Day 039 - 20 Oct 94 - Page 32
1 whether you are advancing your case if children up to 15
2 weeks or so are not actually -----
3
4 MR. MORRIS: One reason I focused on this is because you
5 indicated that it was something which -----
6
7 MR. JUSTICE BELL: All I wanted to do was enumerate the
8 references I have got to direct human evidence so you can
9 take them up if you want, but also as a springboard for
10 Dr. Millstone saying: "Yes, and in addition to that I have
11 this direct human evidence".
12
13 MS. STEEL: I think this is direct human evidence, and I think
14 the fact that this particular study is relating to infants
15 does not mean that it might not also apply to people of an
16 older age group.
17
18 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Why not put that directly to this witness and
19 see what he says?
20
21 MR. MORRIS (To the witness): Dr. Millstone, what is the
22 significance of the conclusions of this study for this
23 case?
24
25 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Let me put the matter which has just been
26 raised. Can we use this study in any way to guide us as to
27 the toxicity of BHA or BHT in respect of people of an age
28 who might be eating in McDonald's?
29 A. The answer I have to give to that is that I cannot be
30 certain. There is a possibility that it would be foolish
31 for me to rule out that people of an age eating in a fast
32 food restaurant would have a more robust haemoglobin system
33 than young infants.
34
35 I observe myself in respect of nitrites and nitrates that
36 the oxygen carrying capacity of young infants was
37 particularly vulnerable. Now, I have no evidence one way
38 or the other as to whether this effect found from BHA in
39 the soya bean feed of these young children, soya bean oil
40 incorporated in the food of these young children, whether
41 it would have a similar effect on older people or not.
42 I am entirely ignorant on that matter.
43
44 MR. MORRIS: This comes into your general thesis that when there
45 is an area of doubt, the benefit of doubt should be given
46 to the consumers rather than the industry?
47 A. Yes. By that I mean this is ground for further
48 investigation. I am not aware of such investigations
49 having taken place. So, here is a question mark. But
50 I must say that it is one amongst several question marks
51 and far and away the larger, from my point of view,
52 concerns the putative carcinogenicity of BHA.
53
54 MS. STEEL: On the subject of where you say it is grounds for
55 further investigation ---
56 A. Yes, indeed.
57
58 Q. -- does that mean that until that investigation has taken
59 place, you think that where a substance is not necessary it
60 should not be used?
