I think that's a perfect example of where the IMS data, the availability of such a comprehensive database—and those were some of the issues I cited in my opening remarks.
We've done extensive work in the research community on specific diseases such as the treatment of infection and antibiotics. There was an educational program launched in Alberta, called “Do Bugs Need Drugs?”, and they needed comprehensive and authoritative information to find out if the program was actually working. We were able to provide the small community with information about whether the program was actually working and whether there was a change in the general consumption of anti-infectives. It was very simple things, such as teaching people to wash their hands, cleanliness and things like that, right up to not asking your doctor for an anti-infective every time you visit because you have a sore throat.
Without our information they weren't able to tell if people's habits were changing, whether physicians were prescribing differently, and whether people were taking fewer anti-infectives. That's a very good example of one that worked in a small community.
Similarly, we did extensive work for the Collège des médecins in the province of Quebec on the use of ritalin in children. They had no supporting information about that. It was a perfect example. You had educational and health issues, with children, physicians, and parents involved. They needed strong empirical evidence, and we were able to provide it.
Without the kind of basic information we collect, you wouldn't be able to provide that. Nobody else has it. The governments don't have it and no other research organization has it.