Yes, but that's an exemption to their drug law. Their definition of “drug” is as broad as ours, and then the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 makes an exception and basically says that for this class of product—they call them “dietary supplements”, but they're the same as our natural health products, by and large—they are classifying them as foods, and then they even go further. Because foods aren't deemed unsafe, they actually put in there that, by law, they're deemed to be safe. It's because they've done a specific exception.
It's like when Vanessa's law came in and created therapeutic products: The definition excluded natural health products. That's how they've done it there. But for the dietary supplements definition exception, absolutely everything is a drug. We had that option. I mean, we didn't have to go there in Canada.
I think the real answer would be the charter of health freedom. Just go to charterofhealthfreedom.org. Basically, the industry and consumer practitioners got together and said, “How do we solve this?” It's to create a third category, different from the United States, but where the industry could compete and thrive.