Absolutely. I think some of the criticisms about CAMR would be a little more credible if there had been a second application, or a third application, and it hadn't worked. At least Apotex moved forward on the first one, and that should be duly noted. Where has everybody else been?
I think what you're seeing on the international level is a movement towards more and more.... I think this is why this debate about compulsory versus voluntary is confusing. The action and the partnerships are actually being developed around the world--generics included, with us--on a voluntary basis. It gets very creative. It gets into some of those programs that the grandmothers have been talking about. It gets into infrastructure. It gets much more creative.
I think we're getting pulled into an IP debate when we're actually talking about humanitarian issues. We can be much more creative with that voluntary effort, and I think the two companies can talk about specific examples.
We get into investing in research and development. We get into community involvements around the world. Sometimes we do it in partnerships. There is the Canadian example of Health Partners International. We actually donate products with them, along with the generics. There are exercises we can do together, versus just focusing on rewriting CAMR.
I don't know if the two others would like to add examples.