Day 024 - 15 Sep 94 - Page 45


     
     1        not believe, to the sodium in the product.
     2
     3   MS. STEEL:   I am a bit confused now actually.  If you read
     4        paragraph (1)  -----
     5
     6   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Just pause a moment.  So what you are saying
     7        -- correct me if I am wrong and this is what I think
     8        Ms. Steel is asking -- in so far as the second sentence of
     9        paragraph (1) suggests that a regular cheeseburger has not
    10        had its sodium content lowered in the past year, that is
    11        wrong if the sodium content in pickles was lowered because
    12        that includes slices of pickle.  But you would say that
    13        the reduction of sodium in the meal as a whole has been
    14        reduced by a negligible amount because the sodium content
    15        of the pickle is very small in relation to the total
    16        sodium content of the regular cheeseburger; is that right?
    17        A.  That would be my testimony today, your Lordship,
    18        and  -----
    19
    20   Q.   It is not what is written but you put that gloss on
    21        paragraph (1)?
    22        A.  You could, and it may have been at the time (and
    23        I just cannot recollect that) that we had the data before
    24        us to establish the facts as were asserted in this letter,
    25        that we had a nutritional analysis provided by McDonald's
    26        in the immediate time preceding the April 24 letter, and
    27        I know we had their ingredient information that had been
    28        given out the year previous.
    29
    30        If we had only that before us, we would be forced to rely
    31        on that information from McDonald's to come up with that
    32        conclusion.  I do apologise to the court.  I could blame
    33        jet-lag, but I think the truth is I was looking at the
    34        advertisement and not the letter and trying to reconstruct
    35        and give the court my testimony today.  But I do apologise
    36        for the confusion.
    37
    38   MS. STEEL:   In actual fact, I was not actually asking the
    39        question in relation to that sentence either, so that
    40        makes it even more complicated.
    41
    42   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Yes, but I want to be clear what Mr. Gardner
    43        is saying.  You ask your question again.
    44
    45   MS. STEEL:   The question I was asking was in relation to the
    46        chart -----
    47
    48   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  That is nutrition information on page 107.
    49
    50   MS. STEEL:   Yes, that is right.  In relation to the chart, if 
    51        you compare the sodium content of those foods with the 
    52        brochure (and I believe you did that) there are many items 
    53        in the brochure with a far higher sodium content.
    54        So these were examples at the lower end of the scale; is
    55        that something  -----
    56        A.  Yes, as a general rule throughout this series of
    57        advertisements, McDonald's only told, as it were, the good
    58        truth.  When they are giving numbers, what they are
    59        telling is only the positive numbers that they can give.
    60        So they will make an assertion using the numbers to back

Prev Next Index