If I can expand a little bit on that, we have one example that is strong but could be a lot stronger. Just a year ago, PHAC, in combination with StatsCan and some other partners, launched the health inequalities data tool. There are 65 indicators for health. Seventeen of them have information about sexual orientation—none about gender identity.
That tool is providing some of the best data we have so far. There are huge gaps, but there is a platform as we get these questions added in in various places. It's a game-changing tool, I think.
Another piece to this is that a lot of progress has happened in the States, particularly since 2010-11. In the States, in 2011, the Institute of Medicine, which is now called the National Academy of Medicine completed a study on LGBT health. They looked at all the research available on health in the States, just American data. Out of that, they developed an understanding of what their point in time was. They also, similar to what we've been talking about, identified all the gaps, and have put funding very strategically into addressing some of those research gaps.
If we could do something like that in Canada, it would be amazing. Some of the data I was talking about today around chronic disease prevalence is from the States, and it's been funded through those initiatives.