To respond to the first question, the metric for deciding what course of action to take from a public policy perspective should always be what's the public health benefit, not just in terms of reducing the loss of human life, but also financial savings and less strain on the public health care system and on economic productivity.
The evidence concerning the benefits of mandatory nutrition labeling that we have currently demonstrated is that it's a fabulously efficient way for producing public health benefits, at least as far as cost goes. So I think there's great potential for having some kind of traffic light system, and I would hate to think that the decision to not go down that road, even to research its feasibility, was dictated by management philosophy instead of the likelihood of having some public health benefit.