Thank you to our witnesses today for your work. I want to echo my colleague's comments. It's truly impressive what the fund has been able to do in 16 years in terms of bringing together governments, philanthropic organizations, and the private sector. In many ways it's setting a new model or a new standard on advocacy and treatment.
I'll tell you that one of the first emails I got from a constituent, Christine Smith, shortly after my election was on Canada's commitment to the fund and to fighting these issues. I think you're also raising public awareness and that's probably helping with the fundraising goal as well, so kudos.
I have an unusual question that's not in any way meant to be political, because I do think the non-partisan nature of support for the fund has been a good hallmark of many countries including Canada.
Malaria is, in particular, challenging because when aid or even militaries deploy, mefloquine has been used as a malaria suppressant or a drug to combat or resist, yet it's been highly controversial. I'm wondering about the fund's expertise with that disease. Are there alternatives—obviously avoidance is one—to combatting malaria that you're familiar with, which would provide insights for not just militaries but aid organizations and others operating in areas where there is risk?