The evidence on this is very clear. There was a comment made earlier that new drugs don't have an impact. If you look at that impact over the entire range of new drugs, there is an impact. In fact, that's where it is most pronounced. As I mentioned earlier, Dr. Frank Lichtenberg of Columbia University has shown that a dollar spent on new pharmaceuticals saves up to $7 spent on non-pharmaceutical health spending elsewhere.
So you have to ask yourself the question, if we spent zero on pharmaceuticals, would we save money, or would we spend far more on other non-pharmaceutical health care goods and services to replace that? I think if you look at it from that perspective, you will see that there is a net savings. The research is clear on this. The Quebec example, among those in the other provinces, is also clear.
There is one other thing I want to address, which is the issue of distinctions being made between new products, such as biologic products, that are being hit harder in this rationing even than pharmaceutical products, which are being hit very hard.... So there are some distinctions the committee should be aware of.