I don't feel very comfortable that we have an assurance—no matter what you might say verbally; we're looking at the legislation—that we wouldn't have another instance where there was a lifestyle kind of thing. I can't think of another example, but I'm sure there must be others, or something else could come up.
I don't hear the assurance that if there were a similar kind of thing, even if it was around mislabelling, that Health Canada wouldn't then make a decision because they would consider it to be a lifestyle issue as opposed to an injury.
Where's the assurance for that?