Day 039 - 20 Oct 94 - Page 45


     
     1        degraded Carrageenan, and I find Ekstrom's evidence
     2        that  -----
     3
     4   Q.   I want to stop you there because if you say "primarily",
     5        that brings in the inference "but there have been instances
     6        where ulceration and tumours have shown after ingestion of
     7        food grade carrageenan".  Is that so?
     8        A.  My reading of the literature is that with food grade
     9        Carrageenan in the experiments that I have looked at, there
    10        are not gross lesions from food grade Carrageenan, but
    11        signs of relatively early proliferation of the kind which
    12        might over a lifetime greater than that of the laboratory
    13        animal produce -- the kinds of effects that emerge from the
    14        degraded form.
    15
    16   MR. MORRIS:  What about the carcinogenicity implications, is
    17        that what we are talking about, or just ulcer?
    18        A.  The clearest indication of overt carcinogenicity have
    19        been, I understand, from degraded Carrageenan.
    20
    21   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  From degraded Carrageenan?
    22        A.  Yes.
    23
    24   Q.   Did you add a word?
    25        A.  No, I think I said Carrageenan first, then changed my
    26        pronunciation but did not change the word.
    27
    28   Q.   Yes.  You see, I am worried about the words like "mainly"
    29        and "clearest" indication, because if you say the clearest
    30        indication of overt carcinogenicity have come from degraded
    31        Carrageenan, that again infers that indications, albeit not
    32        the clearest, of overt carcinogenicity have come from food
    33        grade?
    34        A.  Yes.
    35
    36   Q.   Are you saying that?  Is what you are actually saying?
    37        A.  That is my understanding of some of the literature
    38        which is that there are studies -- forgive me, it is
    39        slightly complicated because the authors of the scientific
    40        papers do not always provide entirely precise
    41        characterisations of the material upon which they have
    42        conducted their tests.  So, sometimes there is a degree of
    43        interpretation as to quite how to characterise the
    44        Carrageenans which have been tested.  That was certainly
    45        true of many of the earlier tests.
    46
    47   Q.   A point which has been made in evidence so far is that
    48        before you carry out a test you have to analyse precisely
    49        just what you are administering.
    50        A.  Yes, but the way ----- 
    51 
    52   Q.   You have to make sure -- it is no use calling it -- this is 
    53        my elaboration of what I have assumed from it -- it is no
    54        use just saying, "food grade Carrageenan" or "degraded
    55        Carrageenan".  Food grade Carrageenan has to be up to a
    56        certain specification, and you have to be sure that what
    57        you are administering to your animals is actually food
    58        grade Carrageenan of that specification before you start
    59        calling it such.  But that is an elaboration on the
    60        evidence but how I understand the point which was made.

Prev Next Index