Day 244 - 03 May 96 - Page 20


     
     1        inconclusive.  No specific links between the consumption of
     2        pesticide residues at the level which would be found in
     3        McDonald's foods and harm to public health have been
     4        proven.
     5
     6        However, having studied in depth the conduct and
     7        capabilities of pesticide surveillance agencies, I believe
     8        it is fair to say that the absence of proof - should harm
     9        have arisen - is not a function of the absence of any such
    10        on the basis of a diligent search, but a reflection of
    11        systems which are so inadequate that there is no capability
    12        to detect harm even if it was present and large numbers of
    13        people had been affected."
    14        A.  I think I need to elaborate on that.  We have a
    15        surveillance system in the UK which has no field
    16        capability.  The system relies on people being ill,
    17        identifying their own illness, providing their own evidence
    18        as to the cause of their illness, and then writing a report
    19        to the surveillance authority which then draws its
    20        conclusions on the basis of that form submitted to it.
    21
    22        There are no officials who actually go out into the field
    23        and investigate and there is no system for investigating
    24        potential pesticide related illness.
    25
    26        Therefore, we have a situation in the UK where it is quite
    27        possible, and in fact has been alleged with some support by
    28        an increasingly large number of people that we do have
    29        serious harm arising from pesticide exposure from various
    30        sources which is entirely unnoticed and unrecognised by the
    31        official system whose task it is so to do.
    32
    33   Q.   Do you fall into that category of people?
    34        A.  Yes, very much so and this is based on practical
    35        personal experience.
    36
    37   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Wait a minute, let me see what you are you
    38        saying.  Are you saying it is your view that we do have
    39        serious harm from pesticide exposure?
    40        A.  Very much so, yes, my Lord.  I have interviewed several
    41         ----
    42
    43   Q.   I find that entirely inconsistent with the top of page 3 of
    44        your report.
    45        A.  Of which report, this report?
    46
    47   Q.   Where you deal with possibilities.  You are saying now that
    48        probably we do have that harm, are you?
    49        A.  Yes.  My Lord, the context is quite interesting and it
    50        is a reflection of the system.  When you look at public 
    51        health workers, I had a long interview with the Head of the 
    52        National Poisons Unit at Guys Hospital in the early stages, 
    53        and she referred to a professional tendency which is very
    54        much I recognised in myself, is that you tend to have the
    55        bug men and the chemical men, and neither talk to each
    56        other and each tend to be dismissive of each other.
    57
    58        My background is, if you like, the bug men, the bacteria
    59        microorganism related food poisoning, and for a long time I
    60        have tended to be dismissive, entirely so, without any

Prev Next Index