Day 039 - 20 Oct 94 - Page 23


     
     1        in other beverages, that this is, therefore,
     2        insignificant.
     3
     4        Some argue that, but that is not an argument I would want
     5        to make.  My approach, since I wish to err, if erring at
     6        all, on the side of caution, I would say that if people are
     7        exposed already to an undesirable toxic insult, then it is
     8        prudent not gratuitously to expose them to a further
     9        insult, even if that insult might be smaller in absolute
    10        magnitude.
    11
    12        But I think it is a mistake simply to equate, say, nitrites
    13        and nitrates in drinking water with nitrates and nitrites
    14        in bacon, for example, ham or bacon, because my concern
    15        about the possible hazards that might arise from the
    16        ingestion of nitrates has to do with the formation of these
    17        compounds called nitrosamines, which are notoriously
    18        aggressive carcinogens, and carcinogens can and often are
    19        formed in the cooking process.  Therefore, a low level of
    20        nitrites in bacon, for example, or ham, might result in a
    21        higher level of nitrosamine formation than a corresponding
    22        or even a higher level of nitrate when present in drinking
    23        water, which is just poured down the throat and passes
    24        rapidly through.
    25
    26        So, I do not think it is sufficient just to compare total
    27        quantities of nitrate from whatever source and treat them
    28        as if they were equivalent.  What matters, I take it, is
    29        the net exposure to nitrosamines of varying kinds.
    30
    31   Q.   What is the case against these two substances regarding
    32        nitrosamines then?  Do you have a reference you can refer
    33        us to?
    34        A.  Well, the nitrosamine, the hazard of nitrosamines are
    35        discussed extensively in the reports from the Joint Expert
    36        Committee on Food Additives.  That is my footnotes 31, 32,
    37        and also all of those at the bottom of page 18, yes, all
    38        those at the bottom of page -- from footnote 30 to footnote
    39        43, with the exception only of footnote 41; all of those
    40        discuss the nitrosamine issue.
    41
    42   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Can I understand it correctly?
    43        A.  Forgive me, I cannot hear you.
    44
    45   Q.   Can I understand the matter correctly?  You are not
    46        referring in your statement to any examples of known human
    47        adverse reaction to Sodium Nitrite or Potassium Nitrate
    48        added to food?
    49        A.  With the exception of footnote 48, that is correct.
    50 
    51   Q.   Let me look at that then.  Yes, I had missed that.  Is 
    52        there any other reference? 
    53        A.  Not to direct effects on humans.  Perhaps it would help
    54        if I explained that there is no dispute amongst
    55        professional toxicologists on the question of whether or
    56        not nitrosamines are carcinogens to both animals and
    57        humans.  There is as close as we come to a consensus on
    58        that matter amongst toxicologists.
    59
    60        The debate focuses on the issue of the magnitude, relative

Prev Next Index