There are two components to that strategy. The first component is we feel that consumer messaging is saturated with anecdotal claims about health and nutrition and what food A versus food B will do for health, so we would rely on peer-reviewed science and health claims to communicate that message. Food companies are very good intermediaries in carrying forward to consumers the sorts of messages they can understand.
The second component though is that we need a continued absence of any unsubstantiated food safety scare that could come from any of these zero or near-zero default tolerances being triggered because of a lack of regulatory harmonization. Even though there's always risk to trade or that one kernel that could potentially be found in a bulk vessel, this agreement, in our view, can only move the needle in the right direction with respect to the potential unfortunate detection, and rejections even, of such events.