Certainly.
In our experience in Afghanistan, there have been just over 2,000 casualities in total. Six hundred and twenty of those have actually been wounded in action, and about 1,400 of those injuries are non-battle injuries. The preponderance of casualties wounded in action are associated with improvised explosive devices. There have been any number of physical and mental injuries to accompany those. Some of the biggest challenges we have had involve the rehabilitation of people following amputations. Those injuries tend to get a lot of publicity, but there have also been any number of non-battle-related physical, musculoskeletal, back, or knee injuries as well.
One thing I would point out is that, in theatre, we now have in place better personal protective equipment. I think that is responsible for a higher survival rate from blasts that previously would potentially have caused a lot more fatalities. People have lost limbs and have had terrible experiences in explosions but have ultimately survived those. I think that's a testament both to the personal protective equipment they are wearing and, unquestionably, to the trauma hospital in Kandahar. A Canadian Forces member commanded that hospital for a period of time, and now it's under the command of an American. In 97% of the cases, if an individual makes it to what we call the Role 3 trauma hospital in Kandahar airfield, the individual will survive. It's a multinational-staffed hospital. People come together and they do miracles there. I've been there on three occasions, and I've seen the miracles they produce.
So, yes, we've had lots of casualities, but I would submit there would be significantly more fatalities had we not had the personal protective equipment and the health care in place.