Day 252 - 20 May 96 - Page 51
1
2 Q. If we look at "saturated fatty acids", we see that the
3 lower recommendation is 0 percent and the upper
4 recommendation is ----
5
6 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Which one is this?
7
8 MR. MORRIS: "Saturated fatty acids", 0 percent and 10 percent,
9 between 0 and 10 percent effectively. Dietary cholesterol
10 is between 0 milligrams to 300 milligrams?
11 A. Yes.
12
13 Q. Then it has carbohydrate recommendations and I will not go
14 into those and dietary fibre. Total dietary fibre is
15 between 27 grammes per day and 40 grammes per day; yes?
16 A. Yes.
17
18 Q. That is what it says. Free sugars as a percent of total
19 energy, 0 percent with an upper limit of 10 percent?
20 A. Yes.
21
22 Q. And finally, salt, grammes per day, the lower limit it says
23 "not defined", upper limit, 6 grammes per day. If you
24 just look at the first one again, the total fat, lower to
25 upper of 15 to 30 percent of total energy, it says
26 underneath the chart where there is a little (b) "an
27 interim goal formation with high fat intake. Further
28 benefits would be expected by reducing fat intake towards
29 15 percent of total energy", so it seems to be a pragmatic
30 figure, the 30 percent seems to be the pragmatic figure
31 because of recognitions of what industrialised countries
32 are consuming.
33
34 With that proviso for the saturated fat levels, would you
35 broadly accept those recommendations as the medical
36 consensus as it was in 1990?
37 A. Well, I must say I am not at all sure that we are
38 talking about a medical consensus. The fact that this is a
39 document produced with the Association of the World Health
40 Organisation does not mean that this is a document produced
41 by a worldwide body of experts deliberating together. I am
42 aware that putting this document together was very much the
43 work of one scientist who happens to be British.
44
45 The important thing about the table that you have shown
46 here, or you have drawn our attention to, is that the
47 right-hand column is very similar to the recommendations
48 that are made by the COMA Committee and I have no quarrel
49 with them. I think that in looking at the left-hand
50 column, you must be aware of what this really means.
51
52 These are values below which presumably there might be some
53 risk. They are not to be looked at as values to which we
54 should aspire, because obviously if we did, then we would
55 end up with a very, very low calorie diet.
56
57 Looking at these values there, these are suggestions for
58 values as a minimum value, as I say, below which there
59 could be nutritional deficiency, so it is important not to
60 confuse this with a target that we are actually aiming at.
