In many ways, it's the question of the moment in health care research as well, because as you know, drug companies sponsor the vast proportion of drug studies that are done, and often there has been the practice of withholding unfavourable results in the past.
I think it's a very germane question, and I think your questions regarding the papers I showed are quite appropriate. Some of them are Taser-sponsored, and you can probably infer which ones are. Some of them are independent. For example, the Toronto study that was done was an independent study, and that was the one that showed that at one to three times the normal dose application, ventricular fibrillation is possible in pigs.
I think it's very important. Whenever I evaluate the results of any trial, I certainly look at the funding source. I think the acceptance of support automatically does raise the issue of the objectivity of the research, whether or not it's unconscious or conscious.