Day 296 - 07 Nov 96 - Page 26
1 predominantly. But an example of this can be...
2
3 I am very sorry, I have not got the full reference, but it
4 might crop up a bit later on. It was from the McDonald's
5 UK, I think it was the 1995 Annual Review, it might have
6 been the 1994 Annual Review.
7
8 MS. STEEL: I think it is the 1993 Annual Review, though it
9 might have been published in 1994. Yes, April 1993.
10
11 MR. MORRIS: Page 11 of that Annual Review. Maybe we could ask
12 if you could read that page again, it did come up in
13 cross-examination. The effect of it is, it is called a
14 question of balance, and they talk about at the bottom of
15 that page, second to last paragraph, "We already offer
16 healthier options in the restaurants. The recently
17 introduced pizza and bran muffins, for example, have
18 provided products high in fibre content." Then above that,
19 obviously, if something is 'healthier' then it implies that
20 other options are less healthy, and this might all just be
21 blindingly obvious but it is put that it comes from
22 McDonald's own public document.
23
24 In the paragraph in the centre of that page, they just talk
25 about "We have made significant fat reductions in our
26 mainstream products" , et cetera, et cetera, "and we are
27 currently looking at ways to reduce the sugar and salt
28 content of our product." So here we have the complete
29 case, really; we have fat, sugar and salt being identified
30 in their own products as being they have made their
31 products healthier by reducing the fat, salt and sugar and
32 they have healthier options in the restaurant, i.e.
33 products high in fibre. So they have stated clearly that
34 these individual products thereby are healthier or
35 unhealthier, depending on the level of the ingredients
36 which we have all identified during this case.
37
38 So that is just an example. Mr. Oakley kind of grappled
39 with this issue on day 64, pages 52 to 56. And Tim
40 Lobstein -- well, it is not a point, really -- at the
41 bottom of page 52 he was questioned about their leaflets
42 were implying that their hamburgers did not have much fat
43 really, and he said, no, they were not trying to convey
44 that, "If we did, it would give them a totally wrong
45 impression." Then he said, "because the product would not
46 taste very good. That would put the customers off, if
47 anything."
48
49 This relates to the point made by, I think, Tim Lobstein,
50 that their foods are high in fat, salt and sugar, which are
51 three ingredients which not only are bad for your health in
52 any kind of quantity, but also sugar and salt are
53 completely unnecessary, and fat is unnecessary above a very
54 limited amount, and they have products that are high in
55 those precisely to compensate for the poor quality of the
56 food and the fact that it is not fresh, and all that kind
57 of stuff. When he said they would not taste very good if
58 they were low in fat, the point being that shows three
59 ingredients, fat, salt and sugar, are the, what you might
60 call... Not addictive, that is a bit extreme, in a way
