Day 052 - 21 Nov 94 - Page 36
1 a more recent episode in which your Lordship told the
2 Defendants before they called, I think it was, Professor
3 Crawford and certainly before they called Dr. Barnard and,
4 therefore, necessarily Professor Crawford, that they should
5 consider very carefully whether they should not get their
6 witnesses to consider the question of causation. My Lord,
7 at the top of page 24 of the same day.
8
9 MR. MORRIS: Is that day 16?
10
11 MR. RAMPTON: It is still day 16.
12
13 MR. JUSTICE BELL: 22nd July.
14
15 MR. RAMPTON: This is Ms. Steel in cross-examination of
16 Professor Wheelock. She asks at the top of the page, it is
17 part of a question or it is the second of two questions:
18 "Is it reasonable for people to give advice that a diet
19 high in fat and low in fibre has been linked to cancers of
20 the breast and bowel?" Answer: "Well, if during the
21 course of" -- then your Lordship intervenes: "Can I just
22 explain?" My belief is that your Lordship is addressing
23 the Defendants. "I take 'has been linked' to include just
24 one person saying that for purposes of this question;
25 whether at the end of the day that is what the leaflet
26 means is another matter entirely. But if one person
27 said: 'Statistically cancer of the bowel is related to
28 intake of fat or saturated fat', then in ordinary English
29 you could say that person has linked the one to the other.
30 Whether that is of any relevance to the meaning of the
31 leaflet or not is another matter entirely." Then your
32 Lordship turns to the witness: "What is your answer to the
33 question that has been put by Ms. Steel?" Answer:
34 "I really am a little bit confused as to what Ms. Steel
35 actually wants".
36
37 Your Lordship: "I do not think it helps to press on with
38 the question. It seems to me you can ask other witnesses,
39 if you like, as to just what the evidence is, the totality
40 of the evidence at the end of the day, and what the leaflet
41 actually means. The leaflet goes on to say: 'It is a
42 medical fact', does it not? I have to take the whole lot
43 together; the use of the word 'link', the use of the words
44 'medical fact' and make what of it I will at the end of
45 the day".
46
47 My Lord, the conclusion for the purpose of this
48 application, with respect, I draw from those interventions
49 from your Lordship is this: As your Lordship has done
50 really consistently since then -- that may not be the first
51 occasion -- your Lordship has indicated to the Defendants
52 that what they need to do is to face up to what it is that
53 the leaflet may properly be held by your Lordship to mean
54 at the end of the case, that is to say, that McDonald's
55 food causes cancer and heart disease in their customers and
56 with that in mind, not only to guide them in the conduct of
57 their cross examination, but in the selection of the
58 evidence which they present to the court.
59
60 Those sorts of indications do, in our submission, make it
