I would think too that we have to start measuring what we're doing. I was surprised by your comment, Dr. Hoch. I think you said we should be investing in research to determine its value. In other words, if we have a protocol and your expertise is in cancer, we're looking at a cancer protocol that we're using now, and then we have a new drug. Maybe there should be ways we can measure new protocol versus old and then we can make an economic decision—actually a quality decision. Whatever the quality, you want to use that as a driver.
Do you have any data that suggests that maybe, when doing all these things in the Canadian health care system, we're doing a bunch of stuff that's not working? I've heard in the past that we get into these little grooves and we keep doing the same thing over and over again, but we're maybe not getting the best bang for the patient in these protocols we're using to treat people.
Do you have data that's looking at protocol a versus protocol b? If we're not doing that, why do you think we're not doing it, and how can we start doing it?