Day 016 - 22 Jul 94 - Page 45
1
Now, clearly, if you achieve a 10 per cent improvement in
2 that, then you make a big improvement in the health of the
nation. If you achieve a 10 per cent improvement, where
3 you have an infinitesimal risk, then the net effect is
negligible.
4
Q. Part of that improvement might be gained, might it not, if
5 people stopped promoting foods that were unhealthy?
A. Yes, well, we are back to a different part of the
6 equation which deals with the recommendations on fat and
unsaturated fat which we have discussed fairly
7 exhaustively, I think.
8 Q. We will not go back to that right now.
A. OK.
9
Q. I do not know whether this matters, but on page 40, going
10 on from page 40, there are various criteria listed, only
to say that there is not very much detail there. We do
11 not actually know why they rank them in that way. So I do
not know whether -----
12 A. All I am doing there is just giving the views of other
people that -----
13
MR. JUSTICE BELL: Do not enlarge on that then unless ......
14
MS. STEEL: My main concern is that if any great reliance is
15 placed on that, that we should see the papers.
16 MR. JUSTICE BELL: It does not seem as if there is.
17 MS. STEEL: You go on to quote, starting at the bottom of page
64, Dr. Wodicka, explaining why he put food additives at
18 the bottom of the list. At the last sentence you say:
"At some point in time the regulatory agencies had to be
19 convinced that the substance was harmless under the
conditions of use or it would not be permitted in food
20 supply"?
A. Yes.
21
Q. Is that actually true?
22 A. Well, I suppose in absolute terms it is not strictly
accurate because it is pretty well impossible to
23 demonstrate that a particular substance will never be
shown to be harmless under any circumstances.
24
Q. No, but also to put it a bit stronger than that -- well,
25 for example, some additives that are allowed in some
countries are banned in other countries, are they not?
26 A. Yes, but what you have to bear in mind is that there
may well be differences between the groups of
27 toxicologists and other scientists looking at it in terms
of the interpretation of the data but, probably more
28 importantly, there are different food patterns between
different countries. Therefore, the actual additives that
29 are in use can vary quite considerably from one country to
another.
30
Q. But they also can be convinced if something was harmless
