Thank you for the question.
I think it's critical to think about transparency in terms of the institutional picture that Health Canada presents, compared with other regulators. Just thinking about it on its own, it clearly does not necessarily have as many resources as would be helpful to deal with some of these issues.
But when we're thinking about writing decisions in particular, the best evidence we have so far, which Dr. Lexchin mentioned in his remarks, is around the summary basis of decisions. Those documents tend to suffer in terms of what they actually contain, but also they're slow and they don't come out readily.
To me, what I'm trying to get at when I say “the reasons behind them” may be a lot of the data, more so than the logic and the description, although that would be nice, too. But if it's a matter of describing and just putting forward the data that was shared with them by the manufacturer, in theory that might be more efficient than what we have now, where you have this sort of very technical process. You're drafting, probably revising, a tonne, the reasoning. I think there could be a more simplified form that talks about the reasons why the risks were considered to outweigh the benefits, and then the actual data as being the reasons as well, so that is more carefully reported. As Dr. Lexchin showed, the very basic information about the sex of the participants in the trial, how long they stayed in, and so on, is often missing. Just putting information that actually shouldn't be that resource-intensive to collate would be very helpful.