Day 022 - 12 Sep 94 - Page 26

     
     1        do you want to put in relation to that, Mr. Morris?
     2
     3   MR. MORRIS:  I think it is actually quite an important thing:
     4         "One of the major objectives in examining the literature
     5        on diet, nutrition, and cancer was to determine whether
     6        any guidance could be provided to the public.  The
     7        committee held the strong conviction that dietary
     8        recommendations are justified only if the evidence is
     9        sufficiently convincing that guidelines to reduce the risk
    10        of cancer have a high likelihood of benefit and are
    11        without discernible risk."  Is that quite a responsible
    12        position to take?
    13        A.  Yes.
    14
    15   Q.  "The committee was also aware of the potential impact of
    16        its report on scientists, the public, and the food
    17        industry."  What do they mean by that?
    18        A.  Well, if a body such as this produces a report of this
    19        nature, making recommendations, that is bound to suggest
    20        to scientists that what they are saying is correct, we
         should therefore be carrying out further investigations to
    22        see whether that is the case.  The public obviously will
    23        be influenced because they possibly may modify their diet.
    24        It has obvious implications as far as the food industry is
    25        concerned.
    26
    27   Q.   Yes. "However, having been persuaded that the evidence was
    28        sufficiently convincing to warrant certain conclusions,
    29        the committee believed that not to offer certain interim
    30        guidelines would be a dereliction of its responsibility.
    31        Furthermore, the guidelines are consistent with good
    32        nutrition and with other recommendations from public
    33        health authorities."
    34
    35        So in terms of -- is it, what they are saying here, that
    36        they consider as regards links between diet and cancer are
    37        "sufficiently convincing", that it is their duty to alert
    38        scientists, the public and the food industry?  Is that
    39        what they are saying?
    40        A.  What they are saying is that this is an interim report
         and they go on to conclude: "'Since the current data base
    42        is incomplete, future epidemiological and experimental
    43        research is likely to provide new insights into the
    44        relationship between diet and cancer.'"  They go on to say
    45        they are urging the National Cancer Institute to establish
    46        mechanisms to review these dietary guidelines at least
    47        every five years.  In other words, they are saying that on
    48        the evidence in 1982, when this was probably being
    49        produced, there was a suggestion that fat was related to
    50        cancer.  But they say it can only be an interim report and 
    51        that the National Cancer Institute needs to review the 
    52        situation every five years.  I have already been saying 
    53        this morning that the evidence, or the information,
    54        regarding the correlation between diet and cancer does
    55        change from time to time.
    56
    57   Q.   I have two more documents to refer to in this section.
    58        Can I just have a minute break?
    59
    60   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Do.  Get yourself organised.