I'll just add, that's part of the need to clarify the language.
For example, in the proposed language, if it says something “contributes to” increased sugars, that could be almost anything that has sugar in it.
The idea of being able to prescribe them, as Mr. Lee has said, is not that it's going to be a list of chocolate bars and things like that, but it's to put it into categories. Those categories are informed by the nutrition science and what should be in that category. Even beyond those categories, if products are unnecessarily scoped in, there are processes to do exemptions as well.
It's challenging to have the debate without seeing the regulations or the policy developed. That's the notion of having legislation that's enabling and then having a regulatory process that defines those.
Again, it has to speak to the intent of the legislation and the regulations. What you're intending to do in this case is to stop the marketing of products that could potentially contribute to unhealthy lifestyles in children.