Yes, mercury is the contaminant that I study the most. I think I can use that example.
I'm not pointing fingers and saying that DND is responsible for mercury contamination in the country. It's only a small player in a big, complicated picture, and we do have long-term monitoring from the environment, from water and air, but also from fish. Actually, when it comes to mercury, we have long-term monitoring for people, for human health—for example, blood—especially in women of childbearing age across the country and especially in the north.
Those data are valuable. That could serve to some extent as an example for other contaminants, right? When we're doing this kind of human health study, it would make sense to start to monitor other contaminants.
In terms of emerging contaminants, there are the microplastics and the oil spills, especially in the Arctic. An oil spill per se is not necessarily an emerging contaminant, but in the north, as we start to see shipping throughout the High Arctic, say, and Hudson Bay, those oil spills will happen, whether it's from the ships or when they were refilling communities or when you have a military base operation in the north. Those things do happen.
A lot of this is still in the early stages, as Dr. Sauvé mentioned, so that we don't really have a very good idea of what's going on. That's something we can build on based on the lessons we've learned from mercury and others.