Day 107 - 24 Mar 95 - Page 06

     
     1   Q.   Where?
     2        A.  Certainly the gut and occasionally low level
     3        bloodstream without overt -----
     4
     5   Q.   Occasionally low level?
     6        A.  In the blood streams of certain animals, rarely, but it
     7        has been found, but that one above all else is also a very
     8        common inhabitant in the environment.
     9
    10   Q.   I have heard something about that.
    11        A.  Clostridium perfringens is -----
    12
    13   Q.   And clostridium perfringens; what about that?
    14        A.  Yes, that is exclusively a gut inhabitant.  This one is
    15        different from the rest because it is a spore former,
    16        seeds, if you like, and it is a what is known as an
    17        anaerobe; it will exist only without air.
    18
    19   Q.   Does that mean it is not a bacterium at all?
    20        A.  It is very much a bacteria, yes.  It cannot live -----
    21
    22   Q.   Is that in animals ---
    23        A.  Yes, indeed.
    24
    25   Q.  -- and people?
    26        A.  Yes, humans.
    27
    28   Q.   Do I have to worry about any other bacterial pathogens as a
    29        significant cause of food poisoning?
    30        A.  I would suggest not, my Lord.  I think once you have
    31        covered the transmission of those primary pathogens, you
    32        have really covered the opportunities for others as well.
    33        My Lord, if I may, you asked for some diagrams.
    34
    35   Q.   You have those?
    36        A.  I have made them available.
    37
    38   Q.   Right.
    39
    40                Examined by the Defendants, continued
    41
    42   MR. MORRIS:  Yes.  You can put it to one side for a moment,
    43        Mr. North.  Just before we go on to the stores, do you
    44        think there is any relation with what you call the
    45        ritualistic testing and the legal defence in food safety
    46        cases of due diligence?
    47        A.  Within the meaning of the Food Safety Act 1990, the
    48        defence relates to section 8 of the Act, whereby it is a
    49        statutory defence if one can show towards claims of
    50        unfitness and related matters that one can show one took 
    51        due diligence.  My view of that largely is that it is a 
    52        contradiction in terms, because most of the ----- 
    53
    54   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  That is not actually what you are being
    55        asked.  I think you are being asked in a leading way, but
    56        never mind, whether what you have described as ritualistic
    57        testing has arisen because of the statutory defence in the
    58        Food Safety Act?
    59        A.  Yes, the answer to that is clearly yes.  It has become
    60        a "game", a very cynical "game", in some industries where