Day 039 - 20 Oct 94 - Page 44
1 A. Yes, this is the most comprehensive review I have been
2 able to find of the range of adverse effects that have been
3 found in animals where Carrageenan has been introduced into
4 their diets.
5
6 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Is that degraded Carrageenan or not?
7 A. Both. As is clear in the abstract, both harmful
8 effects of degraded and undegraded Carrageenan.
9
10 Q. Harmful effects?
11 A. Yes. The second line of the abstract talks about
12 harmful effects of degraded and undegraded Carrageenan.
13
14 MR. MORRIS: Would it be helpful if the judge could read the
15 abstract?
16
17 MR. JUSTICE BELL: You see, what JECFA said -- this is 81,
18 Ekstrom was 83 and 85 -- as related in the WHO report, as
19 I understand it, which was 1984, apart from other things:
20 "Since food grade Carrageenan does not have the same
21 effects as degraded Carrageenan, it is either not degraded
22 or not degraded to the same molecular weight (see refer to
23 Ekstrom in relation to that) or not degraded in the same
24 way".
25
26 So, are you saying that this paper, if I look a bit more
27 closely, will show that JECFA was wrong in saying since
28 food grade Carrageenan does not have the same effects as
29 degraded Carrageenan?
30 A. Well, I read Watt Marcus as implying, that there is
31 some overlap between the adverse effects of the two kinds
32 of Carrageenan, but my reading of the literature is that
33 the evidence of adverse effects is far greater for degraded
34 Carrageenan than for non-degraded Carrageenan. But, in
35 respect of JECFA's comments, I am juxtaposing the more
36 recent -- well, more recent to me -- work by Ekstrom to
37 which JECFA have made no reference which provides -----
38
39 MR. RAMPTON: My Lord, I make two points. I intervene now
40 because it will save time. The Earlier Ekstrom report is
41 referred to in the JECFA report, so is, of course, Watt and
42 Marcus; the later Ekstrom is not because, of course, it is
43 a year after.
44
45 MR. JUSTICE BELL: It is 1985. You see, JECFA say: "If native
46 Carrageenan was sufficiently degraded in the gut to cause
47 ulceration or tumour growth then feeding studies would have
48 shown it", which seems to imply that they do not think the
49 feeding study up to the time of their report did show it?
50 A. Yes, and I have provided a comment in my most recently
51 revised text that I was responding to that.
52
53 Q. I have read your response but I am just on the question of
54 whether feeding studies in animals, of course, have shown
55 ulceration or tumour growth ---
56 A. The ulceration or tumour growth ------
57
58 Q. -- in food grade Carrageenan?
59 A. My understanding of the literature is that the symptoms
60 of ulceration and tumour growth have arisen primarily from
