Day 298 - 11 Nov 96 - Page 04


     
     1        vegetable and marine oils.
     2
     3        In relation to McDonald's role in the diet, he did say on
     4        page 16 that McDonald's meals do contain some important
     5        nutrients but he went on to say that those same nutrients
     6        can be obtained in other ways without the saturated fat
     7        load and he appended his table, which you may remember
     8        showed a different meal which had much higher levels of
     9        vitamins and minerals and a much lower fat load.
    10
    11        He said on page 26, line 17, that he stood by the evidence
    12        that he had given on the last occasion when he was in
    13        court, and he did not want to negate any of it or retract
    14        it.  I think that is worth bearing in mind when considering
    15        the Plaintiffs' proposal that the evidence had got less
    16        strong on diet and disease since 1994 when Dr. Arnott gave
    17        evidence.
    18
    19        Just in relation to Professor Crawford's comment about the
    20        meaning that you have determined, he said that if we were
    21        saying that McDonald's food is unhealthy because it is high
    22        in fat and low in fibre, that they were two points -- well,
    23        he basically said that he agreed that was true, and that he
    24        agreed that diets that are high in fat and low in fibre are
    25        the diets that contribute a real risk to heart disease, and
    26        he specifically referred to cancer of the colon, which was
    27        the one where he considered the evidence was the hardest.
    28
    29        I don't know if this is particularly important, I am not
    30        sure to what extent the Plaintiffs are going to rely on the
    31        statement in the dietary reference values book and the
    32        thing about it not being enough evidence for making a
    33        recommendation to decrease fat intakes to prevent cancer,
    34        just that Professor Crawford did say that there was not a
    35        single -- there was not anybody on the committee who was an
    36        expert in fat metabolism or in cancer and that it was...
    37        I mean, the whole of the grey book was more of a
    38        generalised thing about dietary recommendations rather than
    39        specifically looking at cancer.  Obviously, the British
    40        government has not come back on that yet, has not yet made
    41        its findings public.  That was all on page 43.
    42
    43        On page 49, he was referring to the Finnish study --
    44        I think it was the Finnish study -- and he just said,
    45        anyway, that fibre has always been considered as a
    46        protective agent so far as colon cancer is concerned.  That
    47        was at line 41.
    48
    49        I have not made a note of who this was, but on page 50 he
    50        referred to, I think it might have been Doll, that had the
    51        view that you could explain between 30 and 70 percent of
    52        cancers to diet.  That was around about line 47.
    53
    54        Then on page 89, this was a reference to the World Health
    55        Organisation report and it was put to him that certainly
    56        about the optimum intake in relation to cancer must await
    57        future research such as control trials, but in the meantime
    58        international correlation analysis and other
    59        epidemiological data indicates that fat intakes of less
    60        than 30 percent of total energy - the transcript actually

Prev Next Index