If you're talking about the increase in radiation dose Dr. Urbain spoke of, he was talking about thallium, which is the drug that's used for imaging heart disease, not cancers. If you're talking about the concept in general—should we be advocating for increased radiation dose when we do an examination—no, we should not be advocating for increased radiation dose. The appropriate principle to follow is that the dose be as low as is reasonably achievable.
However, in the current situation, what we are working with is the fact that we do not have access to the amounts of technetium-99m we would normally have. One is then put in a situation of making a decision as to whether the test is necessary to be done now, with perhaps an isotope that will result in a higher radiation dose, or whether one is in a position that one can wait. Other alternatives include accessing MR or CT examinations, as has been talked about by Dr. Lyons. Sometimes those are appropriate. Other times they are not appropriate and cannot show everything the isotope test may be able to show. These things are always—