Actually, probably one of the most pertinent things we deal with all the time is trying to find the balance between regulating on something and educating on something. There are two aspects to health and wellness and promotion. One is how to eliminate risks or how to reduce risks, and the other is how to promote the positive. So there's the negative and the positive.
From my experience, for example, I was writing the standard for child-resistant packaging for medicines back in the late 1970s and early 1980s. So we have child-resistant packaging as a regulated thing, to try to provide the consumer with something that will help them, but we find that child poisoning still happens. It's not because of the closures; it's because people leave open bottles out. So there's the whole education part. Without one, the other is never really very effective. You need them both.
It's the same thing on the promotion side. While you can talk about risk reduction, it's also actually the positive side. In an environment where we're trying to create regulations that might address how people can do better things for themselves, it's often really not necessarily the best tool; although regulation has its place there, it's a lot about promotion and communication. It's an environment where, I would say, self-care matters in the debate.
When that environment comes to the fore, then there's a lot better decision-making on whether or not to just regulate it, and then “out of sight, out of mind”, versus regulate it and communicate.