Okay. Can we go back to a question that Dr. Jaczek asked?
This seems to be significantly different, not just a tweak. You did rule that it could be a subamendment, but it seems it's significantly different from what was proposed by Ms. Sidhu. I'm by no means second-guessing your decision, Mr. Chair, but I do think this takes us in a different direction, so I'm wondering how we proceed here.
Is there a way of finding out if this subamendment does represent the integrity of Ms. Sidhu's amendment?