Day 036 - 13 Oct 94 - Page 09
1
2 Q. "There is then a prevalence of grade 1 obesity of about 40
3 per cent in middle aged men and women". It may be that it
4 is a lower grade for the height, I do not know. "The
5 grounds of obesity are low. Therefore, any increase in
6 fat intake beyond perhaps 20 per cent of energy should be
7 avoided."
8
9 Do you believe, again drawing a very crude picture, a
10 broad brush, do you believe that a reduction from, say, 35
11 to 40 per cent of energy as fat is likely overall to
12 produce a reduction in the body mass index of, say, the
13 American population?
14 A. Yes.
15
16 Q. "Table 11 on page 67", say the authors of this report,
17 "which summarises the links between diet and cancer,
18 suggests that a high intake of total fat may also promote
19 the development of a number of cancers. The evidence
20 cannot be considered sufficiently strong to be termed
21 causal. But most expert groups now consider it prudent to
22 reduce fat intakes in western society from the prevailing
23 figure of about 40 per cent energy towards the 20 to 30
24 per cent figure."
25
26 Dr. Barnard, as an expression of the state of medical and
27 scientific knowledge in 1990, how do you react to that
28 paragraph?
29 A. The second sentence in my reading is contradicted by
30 the first sentence; the first sentence implies that for
31 those cancers listed in table 11 on page 67 for which
32 there is a link with dietary fat, those being breast,
33 colon, prostate and rectum, that, "a high intake of total
34 fat may also promote the development of a number of
35 cancers", presumably those. "Promote", "may promote", to
36 me is a causal link as opposed to "may coincide with"
37 which would not be causal. The second sentence then says,
38 "the evidence cannot be considered sufficiently strong to
39 be termed causal". It is difficult for me to resolve
40 those two.
41
42 Q. May I suggest a simple resolution, it is one I put to you
43 at the end of yesterday's hearing. It is this: The
44 evidence at this stage and, so far as we on this side of
45 the court are concerned at the present day, is suggestive
46 of this proposition, that there is an association between
47 high-fat consumption and some cancers; that it needs
48 looking at because that association may be causal but that
49 no respectable scientist, whether in 1990 or 1994, is
50 going to assert that it is causal.
51
52 MR. JUSTICE BELL: What do you say about that?
53 A. I am sorry, was there a question?
54
55 MR. RAMPTON: I will repeat it. I put it to you that there was
56 a simple resolution of what you see as a contradiction
57 between those two sentences which is this: The evidence
58 at this stage in 1990 and, so far as we are concerned on
59 this side of the court at the present day, is suggestive
60 of this proposition: That there is an association between
