You said that reaction to this among producers was quite mixed and that the livestock obviously isn't affected by E. coli when it's alive. However, there's also an aspect to consider—you somewhat put your finger on that—for consumers, who always want to be reassured about what's on their plates. When you look at the statistics, you see that there are roughly 12 million cases of food poisoning in Canada every year and that most of those cases are mainly our responsibility, as regards what we do at home in our kitchens when we handle our food, and so on. Unfortunate things can happen in a processing plant. There was the listeriosis outbreak, for example. That can result in deaths, unfortunately. In general, however, poisoning cases are more attributable to our handling of food in the home.
I was considering the following question. I know you're part of the pharmaceutical industry and that it's your interest that takes precedence, which is normal. However, when we talk about prevention and food traceability for the purpose of monitoring food as it moves on to the shelves and subsequently onto our plates, and about the importance of adequate inspection in processing plants, don't we manage to achieve a very decisive result at some point with regard to the safety of our food? Furthermore, the addition of veterinary medications and food additives could trouble consumers somewhat. I know that when I eat something, I want it to be as natural as possible. You live with that reality as well. Consumers may be troubled by the fact that vaccines are given to an animal that will probably wind up on their plate.