Yes, I am. I was even accused of being unskilled by my artillery comrade last week.
Anyhow, it was a very positive experience because anything I and my comrades needed, we got. We got put back together and we got back into service, or we were put back into a serviceable condition at least.
I have personal examples. I have a friend who's posted to the college right now. He has 38 years' service and was supposed to retire last year, but you didn't let him because you had to fix his knees and a whole bunch of other things, and he wasn't being released until he was 100%. This fall, perhaps you'll actually let him go, so that's very, very positive.
On similar lines to some of the questions we've already had, it seems to me you're not static: you're very dynamic in the way you're looking at treatments. You're looking forward. You're looking at the NATO example, in terms of the working group there. I presume you're working with CIMVHR, the Canadian Institute for Military and Veteran Health Research, and looking at some of the good papers they've come up with, and in collaboration with that.
Could you maybe describe some of that?
Last year, by the way, it pays to note that the defence committee did a study on the care of the ill and injured as well, which is a very detailed study that dealt with a lot of this, with a lot of the virtual reality treatments you're doing with people who have lost limbs and so forth, in concert with the Ottawa Hospital and so forth.
Can you describe how some of those dynamic principles are at work in what you do every day and how they help adjust and shape policy?