Day 244 - 03 May 96 - Page 06

     
     1
     2        To that effect, it is important to note the Defendants'
     3        evidence on the relative youth of McDonald's UK employees,
     4        the working pressures, and equipment problems.  From this,
     5        it is safe to conclude that - given the scale of the
     6        operations in the UK - that a number of stores at any one
     7        time might have considerable difficulty in maintaining
     8        conformity with standard operational procedures.  In this
     9        context, the system - taken as a whole  - might be regarded
    10        as flawed, containing in-built inadequacies and systematic
    11        fragility, to the extent that undercooked burgers may be
    12        sold from time to time.  Thus, the destruction of
    13        potentially pathogenic organisms in all their produce
    14        cannot be guaranteed.  That is certainly my view.
    15
    16        As regards the suppliers' premises, it should be noted that
    17        the plant which produced the burgers to which the Preston
    18        illness was attributed was clean and in good condition.
    19        (Marshall op cit).  Furthermore, McDonald's purchasing
    20        policy required that all meat used for burger production
         was obtained from EEC approved slaughterhouses, which thus
    22        conformed with the most stringent regulatory codes then
    23        prevalent in the UK.  Yet it is apparent from the Preston
    24        outbreak that potentially harmful microorganisms were
    25        capable of being transmitted through the 'hygienic'
    26        production system."
    27        A.  It is worth mentioning a point here, if I may?
    28
    29   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Keep your voice up, please, Dr. North?
    30        A.  I am sorry.  The current EEC system, which is now in
    31        force for all slaughterhouses in the UK, has, to the
    32        admission of the EC Commission, been based on systems
    33        developed and largely finalised in and around the 1860s and
    34        are largely ritualistic in application and have very little
    35        relevance to the hygienic production meat, so that the
    36        whole context of EC approval has very little to do with the
    37        real application of hygiene under modern conditions.
    38
    39   MR. MORRIS:  Continuing to read:
    40
         "What was also evident from subsequent enquiries was that
    42        there were many aspects of the McDonald's cooking operation
    43        which could have been improved, and - after the UK outbreak
    44         - many changes were introduced.  But, if changes were
    45        necessary, they could have been made before, not after the
    46        outbreak, so preventing a great deal of unnecessary harm
    47        and distress.
    48
    49        It is easy to be wise after the event, but - in my opinion
    50         - this is hardly the case here.  In the first half of 
    51        1982, two E.Coli outbreaks occurred, one in Oregon and the 
    52        other in Michigan USA, arising from the consumption of 
    53        burgers (Riley, et al, 1982)" -- and that is the report
    54        from the National Centre for Infectious Diseases, Centre
    55        for Diseases Control, yes ----
    56        A.  That is the one, yes.
    57
    58   Q.   -- That you have seen.  The other report that you refer to
    59        is the Public Health Laboratory Service Final Report and a
    60        cluster of cases of haemorrhageick colitis and haemolytic