Day 038 - 19 Oct 94 - Page 20
1 European Act. Prior to that Britain permitted 299
2 additives on its positive lists.
3
4 Q. What date again was your survey of the 299?
5 A. 1988. But from 31st December 1992 we were covered by
6 European legislation and the European wide positive list
7 consisted of 419 compounds, and of those I estimated that
8 for 283 there was a reasonable presumption of safety. For
9 185, doubts about them because they had not been fully
10 tested -- even by today's limited standards.
11
12 For 70 there were doubts because those tests that had been
13 conducted were very out of date. For 56 compounds there
14 were grounds for thinking that they could pose a toxic----
15
16 Q. Just pause a moment. We have got to 56?
17 A. 56 compounds. As I say, in respect of those 56,
18 grounds for thinking that they may pose a toxic hazard for
19 some subgroups of the population. For 21 compounds there
20 was then evidence they might be hazardous to all
21 consumers. For 74 compounds there was evidence that they
22 were capable of provoking allergies or symptoms of
23 intolerance. For 45 out of the 419 the secrecy was so
24 comprehensive that I could not do an evaluation.
25
26 Just looking at those figures in summary, it means,
27 I think, that over half of the permitted additives are
28 almost certainly perfectly acceptable and safe, but the
29 compounds whose safety is in dispute in this case, I think
30 there are grounds for doubting their acceptability. But
31 I am certainly not suggesting that all additives are unsafe
32 or that all additives should be banned.
33
34 MS. STEEL: Just to clarify something: When you mention the
35 secrecy of data, can you explain what you mean by that?
36 A. OK. Until the late 80s in the UK (and that remains the
37 case in other European countries) the Expert Committees,
38 the Food Advisory Committee and its predecessor and the
39 Committee on Toxicity, would review dossiers of data
40 submitted by firms wishing to market or use food
41 additives. The position then was that it was the
42 responsibility of the people who generated the data to
43 decide whether or not to publish it. The information data
44 which was not in the public domain would remain secret.
45 I mean, the British Government would not reveal it.
46
47 Q. Can I clarify? Are you saying that was data produced by
48 the companies that were manufacturing the compounds?
49 A. It would be data submitted by the companies
50 manufacturing the compounds or using the compounds. It
51 might be produced by those companies or might be produced
52 by other people on their behalf, contract laboratories, or
53 whatever.
54
55 The British Government, the Committee on Toxicity and the
56 Department of Health were willing to treat information
57 submitted as confidential, and there was no public access
58 to that data. The position changed marginally in the late
59 80s. Many of us were unhappy with this arrangement whereby
60 the scientific basis of policy making was frequently
