Day 206 - 22 Jan 96 - Page 08
1 of this further statement being helpful to the court is
2 that further studies have been cited which do, in fact,
3 give incidences, but what these studies do not do or,
4 rather, what the statement does not do, is to take the
5 particular additives that are in issue in this case and
6 say: "There is this study, there is this study, there is
7 this study and, therefore, the conclusion to be drawn is
8 that there is probably this incidence amongst the
9 population."
10
11 But what is, in fact, done in the further statement of his
12 is that there is the odd study where Dr. Millstone
13 says: "Yes, I think that shows that there is a higher
14 incidence, but what is not done is a list of the particular
15 additives giving the incidence amongst the population. So,
16 it is a somewhat confusing statement and does not, in my
17 submission, go much beyond what was said last time, except
18 that the studies do have reference to incidences, but often
19 they are references to instances which Dr. Millstone cites
20 only to criticise and say: "Well, that is far too low."
21
22 MR. JUSTICE BELL: What, do you mean the studies actually do
23 refer to particular additives and say that this ------
24
25 MR. ATKINSON: It is not entirely clear with all of them, but
26 they are -----
27
28 MR. JUSTICE BELL: He does not actually say that in his report,
29 does he? He does not depart from the references to BHA and
30 BHT, which are very general ---
31
32 MR. ATKINSON: That is right.
33
34 MR. JUSTICE BELL: -- and tartrazine, which is not one of the
35 pleaded ones.
36
37 MR. ATKINSON: No. I mean, it may be that if one read all these
38 surveys, you would actually find some reference to the
39 particular additives in the case, but it is certainly not
40 clear from the statements that we are dealing, apart from
41 BHT, with the ones we have been talking about in this
42 case.
43
44 So, in my submission -- I mean, obviously, it is up to
45 your Lordship, because it is what is helpful to
46 your Lordship. But, on our side, we obviously do not -- we
47 say it to be unnecessary, because it is another day or two
48 days, whatever, in court. We would also make the point
49 that the additives were not actually referred to, although
50 of course they have come in and they have not been struck
51 out, and they are in the case in the abstract pleadings;
52 but they are, it might be said, somewhat peripheral, and
53 the basis upon which they are in is the reference to "worst
54 poison", so far as I can see.
55
56 So that, given, first of all, as I say, it is a somewhat
57 peripheral subject, given that there has not been a great
58 deal of advance on what was said last time by
59 Dr. Millstone, given that it does appear that he cannot
60 come up with a firm conclusion and that the additives that
