Based on that information I would suggest that future trials should be guided by things that seem to be well-established. The prostacyclin thromboxane theory was a little weak. Certainly in the calcium trials a lot of money was spent on fairly weak data. You want the information to be biologically plausible and also a biologically plausible antecedent of mother and baby problems. That means in looking at changes that you’re going to be targeting, you want these to be present before the disease, and you want whatever’s present before the disease to suggest it might be an important cause of the disease. It should get better when the woman delivers. And it’s always important that any sign that you look at before disease may be very pertinent to a subset of women but not all the women.