💾 Archived View for gemini.spam.works › mirrors › textfiles › politics › SPUNK › sp000723.txt captured on 2022-03-01 at 16:34:58.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Date: 10/31/94
OUTLINE: The Ninth & Tenth Weeks Of The Trial
BACKGROUND OF THE MCLIBEL TRIAL
DR. NEAL BARNARD Diet & Chronic Diseases: Dr. Barnard, President
of the US Physicians' Committee for Responsible Medicine and an
expert on nutrition and health, came from the USA to give evidence
over 4 days on behalf of the Defendants.
LEGAL MANEUVERS OF MCDONALD'S
PETER COX - Marketing and Health: Peter Cox, former marketing
consultant, and also former Chief Executive of the Vegetarian
Society, gave evidence for the Defense as an expert on the marketing
of food.
Credibility Gap
Expansion and Subversion
Japan
Australia
DR. ERIK MILLSTONE - Food Additives & Safety: The Defendants
called Dr. Erik Millstone, an expert on food additives safety
policy issues.
Doubts over the safety of additives
Sunset Yellow (E110)
Amaranth (E123)
Sodium Nitrite (E250)
BHA (E320) & BHT (E321)
Carrageenan (E407)
Monosodium Glutamate (621)
Potassium Bromate (924)
Styrene
MCLIBEL TRIAL COMING UP (eleventh week) -
CAMPAIGN NEWS
======================================================================
BACKGROUND OF THE MCLIBEL TRIAL
After several years of pre-trial hearings, the McDonalds libel case against
two environmentalists - who were allegedly involved in distribution in
1989/1990 of the London Greenpeace leaflet "What's Wrong With McDonalds" -
finally began at the end of June.
A total of approximately 170 UK and international witnesses will give
evidence in court about the effects of the company's advertising and the
impact of its operating practices and food products on the environment, on
millions of farmed animals, on human health, on the Third World, and on
McDonalds' own staff. They will include environmental and nutritional
experts, trade unionists, McDonald's employees, customers and top
executives.
McDonalds have claimed that wide-ranging criticisms of their operations, in
a leaflet produced by London Greenpeace, have defamed them, so they have
launched this libel action against two people (Dave Morris & Helen Steel)
involved with the group.
Prior to the start of the case, McDonald's issued leaflets nationwide
calling their critics liars. So Helen and Dave themselves took out a
counterclaim for libel against McDonald's which will run concurrently with
McDonald's libel action.
Helen and Dave were denied their right to a jury trial, at McDonalds'
request. And, with no right to Legal Aid in libel cases, they are forced to
conduct their own defense against McDonald's team of top libel lawyers.
The trial is open to members of the press and public (Court 35, Royal
Courts of Justice, Strand, London WC2) and is set to run until at least
April 1995.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
THE NINTH & TENTH WEEKS OF THE TRIAL
Weeks beginning 10 Oct. and 17 Oct. were taken up with defense witnesses on
diet & chronic diseases, marketing & health, and food additives & safety.
DR. NEAL BARNARD - Diet & Chronic Diseases: Dr. Barnard, President of
the US Physicians' Committee for Responsible Medicine and an expert
on nutrition and health, came from the USA to give evidence over 4
days on behalf of the Defendants.
He said "many products sold at McDonald's are high in fat and cholesterol,
and low in fiber and certain vitamins", and as a result these products
"contribute to heart disease, certain forms of cancer and other diseases"
(including obesity, diabetes, and hypertension). The links between diet and
these now epidemic diseases (described by the World Health Organization as
"the commonest cause of premature death in developed countries") are, he
said, "established beyond any reasonable doubt", and were causal in nature.
He said that heart disease is linked to a high fat diet, particularly to
high levels of saturated fat as found in animal products. "Saturated fat
stimulates the liver to make more cholesterol", increasing people's blood
cholesterol levels. He added that "on average, every 1% increase in the
amount of blood cholesterol raises the risk of a heart attack by 2% or
more". He stated that blood cholesterol levels can be raised or lowered
over a matter of only a few days.
He reported that official bodies estimate that "more than 30% of cancers
are linked to foods", especially breast, colon and prostate cancer. He
pointed out that, in addition to the general problem of consuming too much
fat and too little fiber in the diet, there is also increasing concern in
the US about the carcinogenic mutagens which form on the surface of grilled
and fried meat. He referred to a large body of evidence showing that
vegetarians almost always have a lower incidence of the chronic diseases
mentioned; furthermore, a vegetarian or vegan diet had been found to help
in the treatment of many such diseases. He stated "that McDonald's
products clearly contain significantly more fat than government guidelines
and health authorities recommend". Evidence had shown that "fatty foods
tend to be habituating" and "increase the likelihood of continued high fat
intake". "McDonald's food remain part of the problem, rather than part of
the solution".
It was essential that people had the full information when choosing what to
eat. But McDonald's advertising had been misleading - one example was the
company's promotion during US National Nutrition Month in 1993 which
claimed that food from the meat group "can make it easier to do things like
climb higher and ride your bike farther". He said "the concept that high
protein foods are essential for endurance" had been discarded a hundred
years ago and there was "no evidence whatsoever" to back it up. He said a
more accurate description of the effects of frequent meat-eating would note
its links to some chronic diseases. He quoted the director of a major study
into heart disease, Dr. William Castelli who said "When you see the Golden
Arches you're probably on the road to the pearly gates."
LEGAL MANEUVERS OF MCDONALD'S- Before the case began, McDonald's had
conceded part of the Defendants' case by making a formal admission that
"there is a considerable amount of evidence of a relationship between a
diet high in saturated fat and sodium [salt], and obesity, high blood
pressure and heart disease." They denied any association between diet and
cancer, and claimed this damaging allegation was at the core of the case -
the resolution of which would be so complex that a jury would not be able
to understand the arguments. But, during Dr. Barnard's evidence, Richard
Rampton QC (for McDonald's) conceded that "we would all agree" that there
is a link between a high fat, low fiber diet and cancer of the breast and
colon.
Later, the Defendants complained to Mr. Justice Bell that McDonald's had
now conceded virtually the entire Defense position in this [diet and
disease] section of the case, and accused the company of deliberately
prolonging matters to justify McDonald's pre-trial application against a
jury. Following this, Richard Rampton QC dropped his questioning of Dr.
Barnard and then canceled his further cross-examination of the Defense
cancer experts, Professor Crawford and Geoffrey Cannon due the following
week.
McDonald's are now trying to shift the goal posts by applying to change
their Statement of Claim (the basis of the legal action, issued in
September 1990) to say that the Defendants should now have to prove the
statement (not contained in the London Greenpeace Fact sheet) that
"McDonald's sell meals which cause cancer and heart disease in their
customers".
PETER COX - Marketing and Health: Peter Cox, former marketing
consultant, and also former Chief Executive of the Vegetarian
Society, gave evidence for the Defense as an expert on the marketing
of food.
He said that McDonald's promotional material was "one-sided", sometimes
"deliberately misleading", containing significant omissions and even
"weasel words" which "while ... implying one thing, actually say something
else", as a result ultimately "confusing" and "misleading" the reader. This
was particularly true of their nutritional information and advice which
failed to alert customers to health implications of eating products high in
fat, saturated fat, salt and sugar, and low in fiber and certain vitamins.
Yet at the same time, the company, he said, clearly "set themselves up as
nutritional consultants" and therefore had an "overwhelming responsibility
... to tell people the truth" about these matters.
Mr. Cox referred to a company document from 1985 (not available in stores)
which made it absolutely clear that the company was aware even then of the
links between diet and diseases - it specified heart disease, cancer,
diabetes and obesity. It was his opinion therefore that the effect of the
company's efforts to promote their products as "good, nutritious food" over
the years was "to debase the concept of 'healthy eating' to no more than a
cynical sales promotional ploy".
Credibility Gap - Mr. Cox said their main products were generally
"unhealthy". If they genuinely wish to provide nutritious food, he would
expect to see more emphasis on a choice of vegetable products and fruit
etc. He pointed out that even their salads (still only available in some
stores) had a "ludicrously high" fat content (over 50% calories from fat).
The company's claim to be concerned about healthy eating was not borne out
by the products sold. Mr. Cox told how the company were now promoting their
newest menu item - the "Mega Mac" which comprises 4 meat patties and
contains huge amounts of fat and saturated fat. He said there was a huge
"credibility gap - the difference between the image portrayed ... and the
reality of the food sold". He believed that the few positive steps made had
been taken "perhaps rather grudgingly" as a result of public pressure.
He was concerned that "gimmickry" was being used to promote unhealthy food
to children. He quoted Ray Kroc, McDonald's founder and President until
1984, from his autobiography: "a child who loves our TV commercials and
brings her grandparents to McDonald's gives us two more customers. This is
a direct benefit generated by advertising dollars". Mr. Cox stated that the
use of ads to promote "pester power" is outlawed by UK advertising
authorities. However, this doesn't cover general sales promotion such as
the use of toys and clowns.
Expansion and Subversion - He said McDonald's were "redefining ... the word
'meal'". He also quoted from "Behind the Arches", a book authorized by
McDonald's in 1987, as evidence that McDonald's were engaged in "a strategy
of subversion" by trying to alter the dietary preferences of whole nations,
"very often for the worse". Mr. Cox read the following quotes from "Behind
the Arches":
In Japan, McDonald's faced "a fundamental challenge of establishing beef as
a common food". Their President, Den Fujita, stated "the reason Japanese
people are so short and have yellow skins is because they have eaten
nothing but fish and rice for two thousand years"; "if we eat McDonald's
hamburgers and potatoes for a thousand years we will become taller, our
skin become white and our hair blonde". The book says that Fujita "aimed
virtually all his advertising at children and young families", and that he
stated "we could teach the children that the hamburger was something good".
The company also changed eating habits in Australia. Peter Ritchie
(McDonald's Australian president) said he "attributes that change to the
influence McDonald's has on children". The book concludes that rather than
adapt to local tastes and preferences "McDonald's foreign partners made
major changes in marketing in order to sell the American system".
Peter Cox said it was clear that their strategy of expansion is to "change
culture to suit the product" by "conducting unethical marketing and
attempting to disguise the fact". He described the company's marketing as
"ruthless", "unethical" and "unacceptable". McDonald's, more than any other
company, has succeeded in "manufacturing an almost entirely artificial
image and boosting that image by continual and huge amounts of advertising
dollars".
DR. ERIK MILLSTONE - Food Additives & Safety: The Defendants called Dr.
Erik Millstone, an expert on food additives safety policy issues.
McDonald's uses dozens of food additives in its products and the company
has made a formal admission that, in order to achieve the "uniformity of
their products throughout the world ... they have set formulae and
specifications for menu items and use a number of additives". Dr.
Millstone referred to concerns about the safety of nine of these additives
[Note: there followed three days of scientific evidence and this report is
only a short summary with few direct quotes.]
Dr. Millstone said that as regulatory bodies judged the safety of
additives, and consequently their regulatory status, largely by reference
to tests on animals, they should be consistent in interpreting results and
any adverse effects shown should be taken seriously. However in several
cases where additives had produced adverse effects (including cancer) in
animals, the additives were nonetheless permitted for use (including many
of the 9 additives in issue). Regulatory bodies had discounted those
tests, stating that animals were not always reliable models for humans and
that doses given were higher than humans would consume. Dr. Millstone said
that in contrast if an additive did not produce adverse effects in animals
it was officially assumed it would be harmless to humans. He described how
the results of animals testing were sometimes contradictory (and often kept
secret), and it was hard to relate the results from small groups (usually
50) of genetically uniform animals in a uniform environment to genetically
and environmentally diverse and complex human populations of millions of
people. Furthermore, animals could not indicate intolerances or allergic
or hyperactive reactions.
Dr. Millstone believed that where there were doubts over the safety of
additives the benefit of the doubt should be given to the consumer, not to
the compound or the industry. Policy decisions were supposed to involve a
balance of safety and need, but in his view artificial colorants and
flavorings in particular were not necessary at all - they were usually used
to compensate for processing and marketing problems. He said "if the
object of the exercise was the protection of public health rather than
helping companies negotiate their way through regulatory hurdles" then the
approach he advocated would be adopted.
In addition to the possible risks of cancer and other long term chronic
effects, there was a significant body of anecdotal and other evidence that
additives could provoke allergies and intolerances in some consumers (he
believed this could affect between 1-5% of the population) and
hyperactivity in children.
Dr. Millstone referred to many scientific papers as he explained his
concerns with the following additives:
Sunset Yellow (E110) - synthetic colorant; unnecessary; can provoke
allergic reactions and hyperactivity; increased incidence of tumors in
animals; it is banned in Norway.
Amaranth (E123) - synthetic colorant; unnecessary; can provoke asthma,
eczema and hyperactivity; caused birth defects and fetal deaths in some
animal tests, possibly also cancer; banned in the USA, Russia and at least
5 other countries.
Sodium Nitrite (E250) and Potassium Nitrate (E252) - Preservatives and
color fixatives; useful but other methods of preservation available; may
provoke hyperactivity and other adverse reactions; potentially
carcinogenic; their use is severely restricted in many countries.
BHA (E320) & BHT (E321) - synthetic antioxidants, used to prolong
shelf life of fats & oils; may trigger hyperactivity and other
intolerances; serious concerns over carcinogenicity; BHA is banned in
Japan; in 1958 & 1963 official committees of experts recommended that BHT
be banned in the UK, however due to industry pressure it was not banned;
McDonald's had eliminated BHT from their US products by 1986.
Carrageenan (E407) - stabilizer and thickening agent; several
different toxic hazards have been identified in relation to carrageenan
(including ulcers and cancer), the most serious concerns relate to degraded
carrageenan, which is not a permitted additive. However, native
carrageenan, which is used, may become degraded in the gut.
Monosodium Glutamate (621) - flavor enhancer; unnecessary; causes
intolerant reactions; can effect chemistry of the brain.
Potassium Bromate (924) - used as flour improver, banned in 1989 as a
dangerous carcinogen; previously widely used in bread products, including
McDonald's buns.
Dr. Millstone's view was that the additives listed should be banned
because of doubts over their safety, but in the meantime it was essential
for additives to be properly labeled. He said he could see "no particular
difficulty at all for the company [McDonald's] in providing comprehensive
ingredient listing" on the packaging.
Styrene - Previous witnesses had testified that styrene can leach from
polystyrene packaging (widely used by McDonald's) into food and drinks and
so be ingested by consumers. Dr. Millstone said official bodies had
recognized that styrene can be metabolized into styrene oxide in the body,
and this compound had been officially evaluated as "probably carcinogenic
to humans".
----------------------------------------------------------------
MCLIBEL TRIAL COMING UP (eleventh week) - ADVERTISING
Monday 31st October: John Hawkes (McDonald's UK - Chief Marketing
Officer)
Tues. & Wed, 1st & 2nd November: David Green (McDonald's Corporation -
Senior Vice-President, Marketing Services)
Friday 4th November: Ken Miles (McDonald's witness - Director-General of
Incorporated Society of British Advertisers)
The trial is open to members of the press and public, 10.30am daily -
Court 35, Royal Courts of Justice, Strand, London WC2 (Temple or Holborn
underground stations).
---------------------------------------------------------------
CAMPAIGN NEWS - October Month of Protest Against McDonald's UK 20th
Anniversary Celebrations
Operation "Send-It-Back" launched - On 14th October, following nationwide
leafleting of the company's stores the previous Saturday, McDonald's
headquarters was picketed by 50 demonstrators for 2 hours while employees
were going home. The demonstrators with placards and banners (one reading
"20 years of McGarbage") handed out "What's Wrong With McDonald's" leaflets
to passers-by, and returned 30 sack-fulls of the company's litter picked up
>from the streets. This was the launch of Operation "Send-It-Back", an on-
going campaign designed to pressure McDonald's to eliminate or re-use its
packaging.
National March Against McDonald's - On 15th October, about 500 protesters
marched through Central London to highlight McDonald's exploitation of
people, animals and the environment.
Protests around the World - 16th October was the 10th consecutive Worldwide
Anti-McDonald's Day (UN World Food Day) which was the focus of independent
protests all over the UK and the world. For example: 7 benefit concerts
were held in various cities in Australia; a Ronald McDonald was put in the
stocks outside the largest McDonald's in Wellington, New Zealand; and 80
demonstrators took to the streets in Lisbon and handed out leaflets.
CAMPAIGN STATEMENT: The McLibel Support Campaign was set up to generate
solidarity and financial backing for the McLibel Defendants, who are not
themselves responsible for Campaign publicity. The Campaign is also
supportive of, but independent from, general, worldwide, grassroots anti-
McDonalds activities and protests.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please distribute this information far and wide.
Previous updates are available at Nick Fiddes page at
http://anthfirst.san.ed.ac.uk/