Day 057 - 29 Nov 94 - Page 07
1 make a significant contribution to the kind of diet which
2 in a certain proportion of the population may cause heart
3 disease.
4
5 You have got a big concession on that, and also your
6 witnesses have said (and sought to give chapter and verse
7 for) cancer of the breast and colon. Nothing I am saying
8 about meaning and amendment is designed to underestimate
9 what your witnesses have said at all.
10
11 MS. STEEL: I think the Plaintiffs should have to explain what
12 they mean by "cause" and what they mean by "meals", what
13 they are trying to say in their amended pleadings. We have
14 been asked to explain what we mean by "link", so they
15 should have to explain what they mean by "cause", because
16 there have been occasions when Mr. Rampton has actually --
17 I think when Mr. Crawford was being cross-examined, he
18 tried to insinuate that "promotion" did not mean "cause".
19 If he feels he did not say that, then perhaps they would be
20 willing to clarify what they are saying by what they mean
21 by "cause" and what they mean by "meals" as well.
22
23 It is also a possible scenario in relation to link that
24 link could be medically accepted, and that the medical
25 profession thinks that that link is causal, but that would
26 not necessarily mean that cause itself was medically
27 accepted. So, I think there is a difference there as well.
28
29 MR. JUSTICE BELL: You have put your submissions very clearly,
30 if I may say so. Is there anything more you want to say in
31 relation to F or which Mr. Morris wishes to say in relation
32 to F -- I am not suggesting there should be.
33
34 MR. MORRIS: Just a very final thing on the subject is we do not
35 think their amendment clarifies the issue. We think it
36 actually confuses the issue which is the deliberate intent
37 of it, because they basically conceded our case, their
38 witnesses conceded our case and Mr. Rampton conceded our
39 case, on links between diet and disease. Also, on the
40 subject of causation, we do not know obviously what you are
41 thinking on the strength of the evidence.
42
43 We feel in any event we have proved causation of links
44 between diet and disease, but if that is going to be the
45 issue, then we would certainly want to reinforce the
46 evidence that we have already brought to absolutely nail it
47 down.
48
49 On the meaning of the leaflet, we would argue that it is
50 not possible that someone could, depending on what
51 Mr. Rampton, of course, explains what he means by cause,
52 read in that sentence that "link" means "causation", must
53 mean "causation". Secondly, it is definitely not possible
54 to read into this section that McDonald's meals are
55 causally linked. McDonald's food fits into that kind of
56 diet which is absolutely crystal clear in that section
57 exactly what the meaning of the person writing the leaflet
58 is intending. The word "diet" is used with perfect
59 clarity, that the reference to McDonald's meal is an aside
60 explaining how a McDonald's meal fits into the kind of diet
