Thanks.
I see the pros and cons of both. The original text speaks broadly of foods and beverages that contribute to excess sugar. What I like about that is that it's very broad. I suppose it would be difficult for advertisers to know precisely what that is.
The new text has the advantage of being certain. A person could go to the regulations, and they'll see exactly what is prescribed that they can't advertise, but it will be narrower.
I guess the proof is in the pudding. Whether this act is effective or not is going to depend on how comprehensive and accurate the prescribed list is. Can you give us any comfort as to how broad that list will be?
The second part of that question is this: Could there not be a bit of catch-up in that, as industry develops new products that are not on the prescribed list? Will this be an endless attempt by government to catch up to clever advertisers who come up with a new product, and then you have to amend the regulations? Is there any concern about that?