I'll go back to your first question, since I'm a bit behind here. It always has to be a balance concerning the appropriate use of a drug. There's no doubt about it. We are not advocating that new is the best, which often is the most expensive drug for every given situation. But when it comes down to life and death, or to a product that definitely can change a life, it's not all right to take that option away from patients.
I want to congratulate B.C. for being one of the very innovative provinces from a cancer access point of view. One of our opinions on JODR was that if you have to pick a province to align behind, why not pick the best rather than the worst? That said, British Columbia has better access to cancer therapeutics than any other province in this country. Why not give that province the lead in saying, okay, let Canada go in this direction?
It all comes down to what we are talking about. If we're talking about small things where it doesn't make much difference, I'm totally with you. But when we talk about end-of-life decisions, or products that will potentially make an enormous difference in someone's life, I think access has to be the number one goal. Patients have to come first.