Day 052 - 21 Nov 94 - Page 47


     
     1        McDonald's on this discrete area of the case if you
     2        establish link (whatever that means) rather than cause.
     3        That is all.  Concentrate upon the evidence of the witness
     4        because, at the end of the day, I am going to have to hear
     5        submissions from both sides about meaning as well as what
     6        the evidence actually points to so far as diet and, for
     7        instance, cancer is concerned.  You very sensibly indicated
     8        you were going to rephrase the question, so let us see if
     9        we can find it again.  It is a entirely a matter for you,
    10        because it is your question and it certainly was not my
    11        intention to distract you.  What I would suggest is that
    12        the evidence given by other witnesses that there is no
    13        compelling evidence that diet is a cause of cancer and you
    14        want to ask Professor Crawford what he has to say about
    15        that, is that right?"  Ms. Steel: "Roughly, except that not
    16        just the cause."  Your Lordship said: "You ask your own
    17        question.  I have suggested you do not use proof because
    18        your own witness in his own statement has said when we get
    19        to biology because there is no absolute proof of anything.
    20        That is why for 'proof' I substituted 'compelling evidence'
    21        which I anticipate Professor Crawford might be happier
    22        with, I can see he is nodding, and substitute the word
    23        cause or link".
    24
    25        Thank you Mrs. Brinley-Codd.
    26
    27   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Then there is the question at the top of the
    28        page.  I am only saying this because they do not have the
    29        transcript in front of them.
    30
    31   MR. RAMPTON:  I am not trying to cut it short at all.
    32
    33   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  No, because Ms. Steel does then ask the
    34        question in the light of the -----
    35
    36   MR. RAMPTON:  And she gets the answer she is hoping for.
    37        Ms. Steel: "What would you say to respond to the suggestion
    38        that there is no compelling that cancer was either caused
    39        or promoted by aspects of diet?"  Answer by Professor
    40        Crawford: "That statement is clearly wrong.  The
    41        experimental evidence is quite firm on the promotary
    42        effects of cancer, particularly total fat, and also on the
    43        protective effects of N-3 fatty acids."  Then there is a
    44        pretty long bit which, perhaps, I need not read.
    45
    46        Actually he did say, and I ought to read it, that "The
    47        modern western diet as we perceive it is, I think, you
    48        could cause the word 'causative' of the promotion of
    49        cancer" which represents, I hope, the common sense
    50        concession (if it be a concession) that I have just made. 
    51 
    52   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  "It does not cause the cancer.  I do not 
    53        think we could say it causes the cancer, but once the
    54        cancer is established and you have he genetic
    55        susceptibility to it in place, then I think the diet that
    56        you eat matters a very great deal".
    57
    58   MR. RAMPTON:  One sees there, and it is the animal experimental
    59        evidence as he later explains, that leads him to that
    60        conclusion.  I dare say that it was in the light of those

Prev Next Index