I think there's been a lot of criticism of the pre-market surveillance system, to begin with, in terms of its rigour and ability to really make sure that drugs on the market are safe beyond a reasonable doubt. Even taking into account your qualifying words around risk, I think we have to be careful that we don't lose anything, and in fact try to enhance the pre-market end of things as well.
With respect to adverse drug reactions and mandatory reporting, I've heard you all. I think you make a very strong case about not pushing the envelope on that front, despite the coroner's report in Vanessa Young's case. The coroner recommended a number of other measures. I'm wondering if you think that the recommendations from Vanessa Young's case have actually been acted upon. How are we going to overcome what I see as a deep failing in the system, and that is, when we do get information, how do we make it more transparent and open so that doctors and patients actually make the connections?
In the case of Cisapride, there were adverse reactions, but no one connected the dots. Vanessa shouldn't have died. I don't think mandatory reporting may have helped that. But with regards to getting the information out and getting it connected in people's minds, getting young women to understand, if you're facing bulimia, what this could mean, is there any advice on that front?