Day 040 - 21 Oct 94 - Page 42


     
     1
     2   Q.   They seem to be convinced of the evidence on that at least?
     3        A.  Yes.
     4
     5   Q.   Is your opinion that Amaranth is a more convincing case
     6        than Sunset Yellow?
     7        A.  Perhaps than Sunset Yellow but very similar to
     8        Tartrazine.
     9
    10   Q.   Maybe it was your case on hyperactivity that Amaranth was
    11        ----
    12        A.  If was very frequently cited by parents.  One of the
    13        reasons that people are able to pick out Amaranth as a
    14        compound triggering adverse reactions, is that it is used
    15        in some bright red and pink toothpastes but, obviously, not
    16        in white toothpastes.  Quite a few parents have claimed
    17        that their children's behaviour improved markedly when they
    18        shifted from the coloured to the plain white toothpaste
    19        where the coloured toothpaste was typically coloured with
    20        Amaranth.
    21
    22   Q.   On Amaranth there was a whole thing which we will not have
    23        time to go into, and I do not want to really, the long
    24        document which Mr. Rampton went through which you wanted to
    25        make a number of observations about; do you remember?
    26        A.  I certainly could have done so, yes.
    27
    28   Q.   Is there any particular observation you want to make, maybe
    29        from memory, from that document?
    30        A.  One that struck that I do recall was that there was a
    31        phrase somewhere in the document saying something like
    32        there were no dose related effects.  That usually means
    33        that there was an effect but it did not rise monotonically
    34        with dose.  That I took to be one example where evidence at
    35        moderate dose is disregarded because it does not arise at
    36        high dose, or arises to a lesser extent at high dose.  In
    37        the document I prepared I included some remarks by
    38        Dr. Jacqueline Verrett criticising the practice of
    39        disregarding such evidence.
    40
    41   Q.   You made a point that maybe it is worth re-emphasising,
    42        that the low dose, if you remember, that was referred to
    43        that was not statistically significant.  It is worth
    44        emphasising, presumably, that the other doses higher than
    45        that figure did have a statistically significant effect?
    46        A.  That seems to be the clear implication from the way the
    47        report is written.  That is why I think it would have been
    48        more appropriate if the figures had been provided.
    49
    50   Q.   In that document, this is actually document at tab E of 
    51        Professor Walker, Mr. Rampton did not ask you about the 
    52        conclusions about calcification? 
    53        A.  Yes.
    54
    55   Q.   Renal calcification.  What from your memory, very briefly,
    56        was the evidence there that seem to come out of that
    57        document?
    58        A.  From my memory is that there was evidence of renal
    59        calcification at higher doses.
    60

Prev Next Index