Day 114 - 04 Apr 95 - Page 42

     
     1        MRLs.
     2
     3   MS. STEEL:   I do not think I asked it clearly enough.  Has
     4        there been pressure to raise the MRL or lower the MRL?
     5        A.  Yes, there has been by various interests because,
     6        obviously, if you raise the MRLs it would make it easier to
     7        get away with the residues.  Others of us, well, others
     8        like myself, who said that in good practice one should be
     9        constantly reducing the MRLs because you should not be
    10        getting these residues coming through.
    11
    12   Q.   What was the end result?  Were the MRLs raised or not?
    13        A.  It was really love-all; they were left the same.
    14
    15   MR. MORRIS:  Could we say if this is in the kidney, what are the
    16        implications for it being available in the food that is
    17        consumed by the public?
    18        A.  Well, if pigs' kidneys are consumed -- sorry, I could
    19        not hear that.
    20
    MR. RAMPTON:  I am sorry, my Lord, not by McDonald's customers.
    22        Pig offal goes nowhere near a McDonald's shop.
    23
    24   THE WITNESS:  The pigs' kidneys are examined because that is the
    25        likeliest area.  You cannot expense of testing 100 tests on
    26        one pig carcass and the odd offals is very high.  So, you
    27        normally test the organ where you think you are going to
    28        get the best marker.  So, with sulphur drugs you would go
    29        for the kidneys primarily, but the other organs, the liver,
    30        might have some in.  That is the other organ you look at
    31        particularly.
    32
    33   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Do you have any evidence of residues being
    34        found in the edible flesh of the pig, not the offal?
    35        A.  I have not offhand.  There are green books published by
    36        the Ministry.
    37
    38   Q.   Do you have any soundly based opinion with regard to such
    39        residues being found in the edible flesh of the pig?
    40        A.  I have not without looking it up.  I cannot produce it
         off the top of my head, only in the offals.
    42
    43   MR. MORRIS:  But when they set these, when they look at the
    44        kidneys, are they saying that if it is above the minimum
    45        residue level, do not eat the kidney, or are they saying
    46        that that affects the whole pig and that that pig should
    47        not be on the market?
    48        A.  It is a marker to save you having to do tests on
    49        everything that, by experience, one has found that the
    50        kidney is probably the place where the residues will 
    51        accumulate most and quickest.  It is a cheap test to do, so 
    52        that it is, in practice, probably the best you can do. 
    53
    54   Q.   Yes, but the point is the flesh of the pig, if the kidney
    55        is over the limit, does that mean there are residues in the
    56        flesh as well?
    57        A.  It would indicate, yes, that at various amounts there
    58        were other residues, but primarily it would tell you that
    59        the farmer had not been withdrawing -- he had not been
    60        observing withdrawal periods as he should.  He had been