Thank you very much.
Thank you to the witnesses for this really interesting testimony. It's really important to hear, to listen and to understand.
I want to second Monsieur Berthold's thanks to the interpreters for all the hard work they do.
Hearing deficits are definitely preventable. At times, we're certainly unaware of the effect of noise on our hearing, but I wish the precautionary principle could be applied so simply. In any setting, there are harms and there are harms. After listening to our witnesses from the first hour, do we really think there would be no harms associated with scaling back from hybrid to in-person Parliament only? The simple solution may be to recoil from uncertainty and lack of data, but the more complex solution may be to better understand the issue so that we can go forward.
In that context, I have a few questions.
Mr. Fournier, I think you said there was no consensus as to the prevalence of acoustic shock among interpreters. Did I understand you correctly?