Day 052 - 21 Nov 94 - Page 43


     
     1        Lordship's guidance to the Defendants.  Dr. Barnard began
     2        on the 10th.
     3
     4        What is perfectly apparent is this, that even if the penny
     5        had not dropped before (which, plainly, from the
     6        cross-examination of Dr. Arnott and Professor Wheelock it
     7        had), the Defendants realised what they needed to do before
     8        they called Mr. Cannon and Professor Crawford, because more
     9        or less as they arrived in the witness box we were given
    10        new statements which, in a way their previous statements
    11        had not done, addressed the issue of causation four-square.
    12
    13        When I say "the issue of causation", I mean in relation to
    14        those two gentlemen, not the issue whether McDonald's food
    15        causes these degenerative diseases, because that is not an
    16        issue that has been addressed by any of the Defendants'
    17        witnesses for this very good reason, that your Lordship may
    18        think it would be impossible to find any respectable
    19        scientist or medical man, beyond perhaps Dr. Barnard, who
    20        would be willing to go into that witness box and say that a
    21        McDonald's meal can give you cancer or heart disease.
    22
    23   MS. STEEL:  Can I just say Dr. Barnard did not say so.
    24
    25   MR. RAMPTON:  No, he said it in his statement but not in the
    26        witness box.
    27
    28   MS. STEEL:  No, he did not say it in his statement either.
    29
    30   MR. RAMPTON:  My Lord, that being so, what was addressed by
    31        these two gentlemen, Mr. Cannon, Professor Crawford, was
    32        what I call the subsidiary issue, whether there is a causal
    33        relationship between diet and cancer.
    34
    35   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  There were two limbs, as I understood,
    36        subject to what the Defendants say to me in due course;
    37        firstly, that it appeared to me that the way it was being
    38        approached was (1) a diet high in etc. is a cause of
    39        whichever degenerative disease; part (2) a significant
    40        number of people eat enough McDonald's food to affect their
    41        diet adversely, hence all the business about surveys and
    42        heavy users.
    43
    44   MR. MORRIS:  Is that something in the Plaintiffs' case or our
    45        case?
    46
    47   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  No.  That was what I thought your approach
    48        was, but you tell me about it in due course.
    49
    50   MR. MORRIS:  The third point is that -- we can address it later 
    51         -- but the third point ----- 
    52 
    53   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  You will have your opportunity in a moment.
    54        I am not precluding that.  I am just thinking aloud, but
    55        that is what I thought the relevance of how often people
    56        eat, the numbers of employees who eat frequently ---
    57
    58   MR. RAMPTON:  Absolutely.
    59
    60   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  -- at McDonald's.

Prev Next Index