For my last question, either Andrew Nikiforuk or Dr. O'Connor could answer. There have been a number of health reviews in Alberta over time, of the sour gas industry, coal fires, and so forth, because of similarly related health concerns. But there has been a bias against undertaking epidemiological work.
As I understand, a toxicological study—I'm a lawyer, not a scientist—a proper toxicological and baseline study, would require that you have the baseline information on what's in the environment and what may injure the environment, and then you also need historic information on health records and health suffering, and then an epidemiological study....
Anyway, I would appreciate feedback from both of you on the adequacy of past studies on these kinds of relationships in Canada or Alberta and on what would be needed to go forward. Do we have the correct information to actually proceed with this study?