I want to bring this question of stigma down to the public's perception. Presumably on that list of 23,000, if you take away the 78 or 80, there will be many substances that are truly harmful, and if you remove the toxic stigma it could be misinterpreted by the public.
Is there a concern, if you remove “toxic”, about sort of throwing the baby out with the bathwater here? We're only talking about 78 or 80 substances that have a question about a negative stigma from the word “toxic”. Are we opening the door, in terms of public perception, to looking at truly harmful substances and saying that maybe they're not so harmful anymore?
I'd like some discussion on that.