Day 256 - 04 Jun 96 - Page 85


     
     1        bowel, is one in 1,000?
     2        A.  I would say so.
     3
     4   Q.   Let me just make a note.  Is that the cause or part of a
     5        multifactorial basis?
     6        A.  Could you explain that, please?
     7
     8   Q.   Are you saying that the chance of a high fat diet including
     9        animal fat not being causal of cancer is one in 1,000, is
    10        that as the sole cause?
    11        A.  No.
    12
    13   Q.   Elaborate on that, then.
    14        A.  The high intake of the fat coming from animal products
    15        of course tends to displace, of course, the consumption of
    16        foods of plant origin.  So those kind of foods being
    17        displaced are going to allow for an increase in risk, as
    18        well.
    19
    20   Q.   I understand that.  But it is all diet rather than other
    21        factors?
    22        A.  Right, yes.  I am sorry.  Right.
    23
    24   Q.   Once you have genetic susceptibility?
    25        A.  Yes.
    26
    27   MR. MORRIS:  Does everybody have the genetic susceptibility?
    28        A.  Yes.  You raise that question, actually.  It turns out
    29        that I am absolutely convinced there is going to be a
    30        cluster of genes for every single disease that is known to
    31        human kind; it is just a matter of time before we discover
    32        this; and we are all going to have some genetic
    33        susceptibility to some disease.  That I will stand on.  If
    34        there is anything I can stand on, that is it.  In turn, it
    35        is not the genes that actually establish risk.  That is a
    36        misperception at the present time.  It really is the
    37        factors that actually allow the expression of these genes
    38        that lead to disease, and those factors are largely dietary
    39        in origin.  In fact, the data -- I can cite two studies to
    40        illustrate this point quite dramatically.  One study is the
    41        report by Sir Richard Doll and Richard Peto, where they
    42        analyse a large number of different studies, and came to
    43        the conclusion that not more than two to three per cent of
    44        all cancers were genetically based.  Another study was done
    45        recently, a year ago last spring, the largest study done so
    46        far of identical and paternal twins; it was done at the
    47        National Cancer Institute in the United States and
    48        published in the Cancer Research Journal, a journal of
    49        cancer research -- I think that was a journal.  Basically,
    50        they found in that kind of comparison that whereas one 
    51        would expect the second member of an identical twin to get 
    52        the same cancers, more or less, as the first member, 
    53        because they have the same genes, it turned out not to be
    54        the case.
    55
    56        So, even though we have a genetic susceptibility for
    57        getting these diseases, every one of us, some disease, the
    58        fact of the matter is, that is not what really leads to
    59        disease.  What leads to disease is the long the period
    60        between the genetic susceptibility and the disease itself;

Prev Next Index