Day 014 - 20 Jul 94 - Page 45
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Non-starch polysaccharides; cellulose is one of those,
yes?
3 A. That is right.
4 Q. We see that it is insoluble?
A. Yes.
5
Q. We see also that it is very widely distributed especially
6 in leafy, vegetable, peas, beans and rhubarb?
A. Yes.
7
Q. Then we get non-cellulosic polysaccharides: Pectines
8 which are soluble, namely, fruit and vegetables; Glucans
which are soluble, oats, barley and rye; Arabinogalactans
9 and arabinoxylans which are partly soluble and you find
those in wheat, rye and barley. I will not go on with that
10 table for the moment, at least.
11 So far as any dietary or nutritional or health benefit is
perceived to be derived from the ingestion of NSPs -- can
12 I call them "fibre" from now on the understanding that you
have you said that the committee is right to concentrate
13 on non-starch polysaccharides, it is easier to call it
fibre?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. In so far as any benefit, or whatever, is to be observed
from the ingestion of fibre as part of the diet, is there
16 a distinction to be noticed between what is soluble or
partly soluble in the digestive system and what is not --
17 I mean, sorry, what is soluble?
A. Yes, there would be.
18
Q. Yes. Is there work which suggests that so far as there is
19 an observable benefit, the insoluble or partly soluble
fibres are more beneficial than the soluble ones, or may
20 be, I should say?
A. Possibly.
21
Q. Can I take you then, please, to -----
22
MR. JUSTICE BELL: It is only "possibly", why is the
23 distinction to be made?
A. Well, the main distinction is to try and make some
24 sense from a chemical point of view because,
traditionally, the fibre really did not make any sense at
25 all from a chemical point of view. It was actually
referred to as crude fibre which I think aptly represented
26 what it was. The attempts now are being made to try and
understand the chemistry in greater detail with a view to
27 achieving a greater understanding of the role of the
different components in relation to health.
28
Q. Does that mean that one can forget the distinction so far
29 as nutrition is concerned?
A. Except in the sense that there are different types in
30 different foods.
