Day 265 - 19 Jun 96 - Page 10

     
     1        about appropriate or inappropriate diet, of course -- the
     2        figure of about one third is repeated, and therefore I
     3        guess I would say the validity of that judgment -- that is
     4        not a fact, of course, it is a judgement -- is
     5        consolidated.
     6
     7             If you take that as an estimate which is based on the
     8        best current scientific judgment you can relate it to the
     9        fact that roughly 160,000 people in this country die every
    10        year from one form of cancer or another, and it happens
    11        that the EU figure is about five times that.  Relevant to
    12        that point, is that recently the Imperial Cancer Research
    13        Fund, in promoting its own epic study of diet and cancer,
    14        which I am sure has been mentioned in evidence in this
    15        case, has come up with the suggestion that appropriate
    16        dietary recommendations could result in 220 lives saved in
    17        Europe every year and I --
    18
    19   Q.   220?
    20        A.   Yes.
    21
    22   Q.   Sorry, is that 220,000?
    23        A.   220,000, excuse me.  I think from memory I think that
    24        is excluding alcohol because sometimes diet is held to
    25        include and sometimes exclude alcohol.  The global figure
    26        simply translates down from the facts.  In fact, I think
    27        that figure is not exact maths.  Again, I think the number
    28        of deaths a year from cancer throughout the world is
    29        something like 6,700,000, so it would be more accurate if
    30        you are talking about 35 per cent or a third to give a
    31        figure of something over two million, say, two and a
    32        quarter million rather than two and a half.
    33
    34   Q.   Right.  Does this accord with your views and your
    35        conclusions from your work?
    36        A.   Yes.
    37
    38   Q.   (Continuing to read): "Strengthening of the evidence.  The
    39        scientific data accumulated in the literature generally
    40        have strengthened causal links between aspects of diet and
         cancer risk.
    42
    43        "Controversy:  fat and breast cancer.  There are some areas
    44        of controversy.  The example of which I am aware relevant
    45        to this case is the relationship of dietary fat and breast
    46        cancer.  Studies carried out within countries such as USA
    47        among relatively homogenous adult populations consistently
    48        find no association between intake of dietary fat and risk
    49        of breast cancer.  The findings of these studies are
    50        contradicted by those of other cross-cultural studies with 
    51        less statistical power and for animal experiments which 
    52        consistently do find a link.  There are three possible 
    53        explanations.  One, is that fat is not related to risk of
    54        breast cancer.  Two, is that any effect of fat will not be
    55        found in societies such as the USA (and the UK), virtually
    56        all of whose populations have consumed fat at levels that
    57        put them at risk of breast cancer.  The third explanation
    58        is that fat does increase risk of breast cancer but in
    59        early life, in which case the critical factor is diets
    60        eaten by girls in childhood.  I believe that Professor