In my case, going back to 1996, it was really types of surgery and surgical delays. And there was what we call hepatic arterial infusion, a process for infusing chemo directly to the liver, that wasn't offered in Canada. So the delays were a big issue, perhaps, more so than the actual medications.
The principle is still the same, and that applies, for example, in Ontario, where patients are leaving Ontario to go to Buffalo, to Roswell Park, to receive Erbitux. Then they're reimbursed through OHIP, yet they can't get it in their own province. These anomalies seem to go on throughout the country, particularly....
Let's get down to the point. When we talk about cost-effectiveness, we're talking about cost. It is also about the effect, but really, if the cost were very little, we wouldn't be worrying so much about it. So what we need to do to have equalization of these types of treatments is to have perhaps a new and novel method of reimbursement.
This is an example--I always throw out examples to make people think. What if we had a system, an insurance plan, like we have in Quebec? What if the federal government created a special drug fund for expensive cancer treatments? And what if the pharmaceutical companies would lower their prices, knowing there would be greater access to the availability of the product? Perhaps we need new and novel solutions.
When I left the country, it was life and death. I could stay in Canada and accept my fate or go and get these--accepted, by the way--treatments. You can't just leave the country and expect to be reimbursed. We understand. We have a process for that. In my case, I spent $250,000, and ultimately, through the Quebec Superior Court, RAMQ was ordered to reimburse. The same principles apply, though, today.