Day 039 - 20 Oct 94 - Page 14
1
2 MR. RAMPTON: Exactly.
3
4 MR. JUSTICE BELL: If Professor Walker was suggesting that all
5 anecdotal evidence is unsatisfactory, you would draw issue
6 with that for the reasons which you have just set out?
7 A. Yes, I would indeed. Whether Professor Walker -----
8
9 Q. Is there more to say than that, Dr. Millstone?
10 A. That might be Professor Walker's view; it may not be
11 Professor Walker's view that anecdotal evidence is
12 unsatisfactory, but it has really been an official view of
13 the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. I was
14 present a couple of years ago at a meeting of the Guild of
15 Food Writers when we were being addressed by the then
16 Secretary of State, Mr. Gummer. Mr. Gummer then made a
17 rather curious observation when he said that he was
18 convinced his own son reacted acutely and adversely to
19 Tartrazine. But since his official advisers told him this
20 could not happen, he had to believe the advisers and not
21 the immediate experience in his own family. So, even the
22 Secretary of State seems to disregard the evidence in his
23 own family that artificial colours -----
24
25 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Let us leave it there -- no disrespect to Mr.
26 Gummer.
27
28 MR. MORRIS: All I am saying is that, presumably, there is
29 anecdotal evidence on a wide range of -----
30
31 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Mr. Morris has explained very clearly the
32 different strengths there may be in anecdotal evidence.
33
34 MR. MORRIS: When we say there is anecdotal evidence, say, for
35 Sunset Yellow, is that strong anecdotal evidence or, you
36 know, very little and very weak?
37 A. As I have indicated, some strong and some is weak.
38
39 Q. With Sunset Yellow?
40 A. And with Amaranth. Should I then go on to the next
41 category?
42
43 Q. Yes.
44 A. Amaranth and carcinogenicity. The main focus of the
45 debate -- sorry, one of the main focuses of the debate
46 about the carcinogenicity of Amaranth has been concerned
47 with the issue of its suspected carcinogenicity in
48 laboratory animals.
49
50 A study was conducted or several studies were conducted in
51 what was then the Soviet Union reported in the early 70s
52 and Adrianova reported that two per cent of Amaranth, which
53 was then a standard dose in such tests, caused cancer in 13
54 out of 15 rats.
55
56 Now, a group of 15 rats is relatively small and that would
57 fall short of the standards required of a proper
58 carcinogenicity study in this day and age. But even then
59 and now it is extremely rare to find a compound capable of
60 causing, apparently causing, cancer in such a large
