Day 014 - 20 Jul 94 - Page 26
1 down 3 to 19-50 years, and go across to the sodium column,
you see that his RNI or that group's RNI is expressed to
2 be 70 MMOL?
A. That is right.
3
Q. If we express that in milligrams we get a figure of 1,610,
4 is that right?
A. Yes, round about that.
5
Q. Can I ask you a preliminary question about these figures,
6 these recommendations, DRV's or whatever: Are they to be
regarded as hard and fast rules, as it were?
7 A. Good heavens, no. Given the difficulties there are in
reaching them (and this is explained later on in the
8 report), we have to realise that in some cases they may be
no better than guesstimates.
9
Q. Is there an element, so far as DVR's ---
10 A. DRV's.
11 Q. -- sorry, DRV's are concerned, is there an extent to which
the DRV errs on the side of caution?
12 A. There probably is, but I think one would need to be on
the inside in reaching those conclusions to be able to say
13 that definitively.
14 MR. JUSTICE BELL: There is not a percentage safety allowance
allowed, or anything like that? If they err on the side
15 of safety it is because of the personality of the
committee and their general attitude, is it?
16 A. To the best of my knowledge, it would depend on that
and it would depend on the kind of evidence there was
17 available on the individual nutrient.
18 MR. RAMPTON: Might it depend on, as his Lordship suggests,
first the personality of the members of the committee, or
19 the approach? Second, might it depend upon the evidence,
either acquitting or condemning?
20 A. Yes, I would imagine there would be certain guidelines
laid down by the main panel and these would be taken into
21 account by the groups looking at the individual nutrients
themselves.
22
Q. Might it also depend on the extent to which a particular
23 substance was thought to have or was under suspicion of
potential effect of having an adverse effect on health?
24 A. Oh, yes. That would have to be taken into account.
I would give an example with vitamin A: It has been
25 established that as little as THREE times the recommended
daily intake or, perhaps, the DRV might actually be toxic,
26 so there is a need to be careful in certain cases if there
is a possibility of a risk.
27
Q. Can we turn to a more detailed consideration of physical
28 activity level which, as I have understood this report, is
an important ingredient in estimating the average
29 requirement for energy?
A. Yes.
30
Q. Is that straightforward science?
