Thank you for the question.
As part of the CSAS process and the conflict of interest policy, it's very clear that the focus of the discussion is not the subsequent management decision that is made as a result of the advice we give, but very much what evidence base we can bring forward in this discussion—where the data is, where the published papers are and where the peer-reviewed advice from other jurisdictions is that we can bring to bear on the issue at hand. As I mentioned, the chair, ultimately, is responsible for ensuring that the impartiality and the spirit of consensus based on evidence are respected throughout the process. The policy also states that, if that is not the case, that would have impacts on being accommodated and recognized as an expert in future meetings.