Day 107 - 24 Mar 95 - Page 66


     
     1        A.  I think if there had been I would have been aware.
     2
     3   Q.   You know there has only been -- I say only, regrettable
     4        enough in all conscience, but there has only been the one
     5        case of outbreak of E.coli 0157 at Preston in January 1991?
     6        A.  Well, I do not think that is strictly true, sir.
     7
     8   Q.   Why do you say that?
     9        A.  My understanding of the Preston outbreak is that was a
    10        multi-locus outbreak and, therefore, there were other shops
    11        involved.
    12
    13   Q.   For the purpose of this case McDonald's have accepted some
    14        responsibility for that outbreak, on the basis that the
    15        epidemiology showed that it was probable that, at any rate,
    16        some of the victims had eaten hamburgers at that restaurant
    17        over a period of time on one day.
    18        A.  That is the general thrust of the report, as I
    19        understand it.
    20
    21   Q.   That is the general thrust.  The suspicion was (and it has
    22        been accepted for the purposes of this case) that the
    23        reason was that for some part of that day the hamburgers
    24        were being under-cooked?
    25        A.  It seemed also that the mechanism was occurring in
    26        other shops.
    27
    28   Q.   Yes, it may have been, but the multi-local, or whatever you
    29        like, source of the disease was not in every case
    30        McDonald's, you see.  I do not want to argue -----
    31        A.  I do not think we need spar on this.
    32
    33   Q.   No, do not let us go into it, but assume that McDonald's
    34        were, to some extent, at least responsible for that
    35        outbreak, which was a serious outbreak -- no doubt about
    36        that -- over that period of time and, given the number of
    37        meals served, do you have any comment about the fact that
    38        there is only one such identifiable outbreak or not?
    39        A.  It is a relatively new disease.
    40
    41   Q.   In this country?
    42        A.  In this country.
    43
    44   Q.   Do you know when it was first identified in this country?
    45        A.  Let us see, I am not sure in this country, I think was
    46        it a Sheffield outbreak -- I cannot remember exactly.
    47
    48   Q.   Tell me something which perhaps I should have asked
    49        Mr. Bennett (and I will ask for once in my life a question
    50        to which I do not know the answer):  Suppose you have a 
    51        discovery of what might be a mutated strain of E.coli or a 
    52        form of E.coli 0157: H7 discovered (which was America in 
    53        1982), by what means is it possible, if at all, to predict
    54        the migration of that mutated strain to other countries?
    55        A.  We have some models for that.
    56
    57   Q.   Some?
    58        A.  Some models.  The salmonella progression, the strains
    59        of salmonella progression, we have actually some history of
    60        seeing how they spread worldwide, and different salmonellas

Prev Next Index