I don't have any difficulty with that. It's just that when someone suggests that they are investing in R and D, when investments or patents are being made in other countries, and we have a residual of simply warehousing in Canada, and yet these amounts of moneys that are being suggested....
I appreciate that you're working with universities, and I think that's very good. So are the generics, at the same time. I'm trying to figure this out, not with respect to SR and ED but with respect to the definition of the Income Tax Act. If you are educating the public about your product, for instance, and it falls under the definition of R and D, to what extent are your R and D claims in fact not real research? To what extent are they for advertising or marketing your product or, in other words, selling your product directly to pharmacists, or whatever the case may be?