Day 001 - 28 Jun 94 - Page 38


     
     1
              As it happens, a person can safely include a considerable
     2        quantity of McDonald's food in his or his children's diet
              without causing the slightest risk to his or their health.
     3
              Next, my Lord, this:  Despite the obvious truths that diet
     4        and food are two quite separate considerations, and that
              the decision as to what food should be included in a diet
     5        is the decision of the person who eats it, may it
              nonetheless be credibly suggested that McDonald's wish to
     6        sell food leads it to deceive people as to the composition
              and the health value of the food?
     7
              My Lord, again, in our submission, the answer to that
     8        question is, plainly, no.
 
     9        My Lord, as your Lordship may already know, for some
              considerable time now, McDonald's have been producing a
    10        wide range of leaflets for their customers which give
              detailed nutritional information and advice about their
    11        food.  This includes not only leaflets about the general
              composition of the food and the ingredients and so on and
    12        the amounts of protein and fat and so on that is to be
              found in the food, but specialist publications as well,
    13        for example, advice to diabetics.
 
    14        McDonald's was the first restaurant company ever to do
              this.  In the opinion of Dr. Arnott and Professor Keene
    15        these leaflets are entirely satisfactory.  Professor
              Wheelock will naturally say something to the same effect
    16        because, of course, he helped write them.
 
    17        Third, my Lord, this, ignoring the confusion which the
              defendants have made between diet and food, is there, in
    18        fact, any credible or reliable scientific evidence of a
              causal relationship between, on the one hand, a diet high
    19        in animal fat, sugar and sodium, and low in fibre, and, on
              the other hand, first, heart disease, second, as the
    20        defendants now allege, cancer of the bowel, breast, ovary,
              uterus, prostrate and pancreas and, finally, diabetes?
    21
              The plaintiffs accept (and have always accepted) that
    22        there is a recognised association between a diet which is
              high in fat and salt and heart disease.  That is why in
    23        their leaflet they are at pains to advise their customers
              to eat McDonald's food as part of a balanced diet, but the
    24        plaintiffs do not accept that there is any respectable
              body of scientific opinion or evidence to suggest a causal
    25        relationship between such a diet and any form of cancer or
              diabetes. 
    26 
              It is true that there is a body of epidemiological and 
    27        clinical work which has from time to time appeared to
              suggest a relationship or association -- your Lordship
    28        will notice that I omit the word "causal"-- between a diet
               -- again I emphasise the word "diet" -- which is high in
    29        animal fat and low in fibre and certain forms of cancer
              and diabetes on the other hand.
    30
              The clear opinion of all the plaintiffs' experts is that

Prev Next Index