I guess what I'm talking about--I think the point has been raised and has been answered--is the fact that a number of GMOs are actually playing a significant role in agriculture right now. We're just going through a study on competition, and I can tell you that without the help of genetically modified organisms, agriculture would be in a much more difficult situation.
I think we always have to be science-based, so I appreciate your comments. I support GMOs in most cases, but I think we always have to have that alert bell in terms of knowing what we're going to do when the approval process comes along.
You talked about a number of them in terms of the benefits. I want to bring up an article I read on the growing of rice in countries where salt water has been filtering into the fresh water system. Obviously rice won't grow if it isn't in fresh water. There's now some genetically modified rice that is actually able to grow, or it's being proposed that it can grow, in salt water. These are not in countries like Canada. These are in countries where they actually are struggling to grow foods that become staple for them.
It seems to me that absolute safety is where we're going with regard to the labelling or with regard to the research that goes with it. Whether it's conventional, whether it's GMO, or whether it's organic, any of those three, is there any absolute safety? Is the risk any higher in GMOs, and have there been any studies to indicate that?
That's for Mr. Yada, Mr. Ellis, or whoever.