Okay, I'll start.
Thank you for your question.
There are risk considerations, and that's why the safety assessment process is there. If genetic modification didn't have any potential to introduce risk, then we wouldn't need it. We recognize that if in modifying an organism...because you are changing the heritable traits of the organism, if you introduce a gene associated with toxicity as an example, then you will be introducing risk. That's why we carry out these careful assessments.
In those assessments, we also want to determine whether, in accomplishing the modification you have made because you're affecting the metabolism of the organism, there are any additional effects. These are all carefully considered.
There have been reports from researchers pointing to their views of risks. We look at those reports carefully. I can say with confidence the products of biotechnology, which have been reviewed and approved for the marketplace, have not shown any evidence of adverse effect, even after many years of presence in the marketplace as animal feeds. I'm sure my colleague can speak to it in the context of human foods. The record with respect to biotechnology product approvals—I'm not saying biotechnology in general, but for products that are reviewed and approved using the guidance that is available—is extremely positive.
That doesn't mean it's impossible to create risk. It's not. That's why we do the work we do.