If you listen to his precise words, he gave an undertaking he...

If you listen to his precise words, he gave an undertaking he "wouldn't go to the market for dilutionary operational capital."
BUT
he then qualified this very clearly:
"future acquisitions, product issues, debt funding, TAVR is a whole different discussion."

It's like Gillard when asked about a carbon tax*.
When she answered (no government I lead will bring in a carbon tax) she was expecting to win government outright.
You can see contextually that's what she meant.
But most people pretended that context was meaningless.
It was central.

Here WP is clearly setting out the exceptions at the outset.

You can hear what you want to. I think what WP says is clear.

(*BTW industry has been crying out for a carbon tax and certainty about pricing carbon emissions ever since then...
it's not just ironic, it's monumentally stupid to not revise your position depending on circumstance.)