I'm concerned, as lots of people are, about where this fits with the precautionary principle. Showing something is not dangerous yet doesn't necessarily mean it's safe. Canadians are worried about this, and I'd like to know a little more about the science with which you determine 0.1 or 0.01--how you actually sort this out. Maybe you should just start with that.
I've always had concerns with experiments done on rats, because rats live their lives in sewers and spend their lives detoxifying themselves, and maybe their livers are a bit better than human livers. How do we assume that something that's okay for a rat is okay for a human?