(page 88, lines 24-34 and page 89, lines 1-6).
- Shlita confirmed, towards the end of his cross-examination, inter alia, as follows:
Q: All your reviews you wrote about Radicals And you wrote about Excess morbidity And you wrote about Number of Monitoring Stations And you wrote about Causal connection between a certain substance and a disease. All these things are not In your area of expertise Rather, you read, you brought it into a document and submitted it to the court?
A: Good enough, yes
(p. 298).
- Shlita was introduced, and he was asked, among other things, about the subject of 'free radicals' – which constitutes the core of his opinion, as follows:
Q: Your thesis is that excess radicals cause cancer.
A: True.
Q: So one case of a type of cancer that isn't caused by excess radicals is enough to contradict the thesis, right?
A: It doesn't have to be because there are different mechanisms. If heavy metals... If you look here at the beginning, before the table there is an article that shows, if heavy metals come in, they have, there are metals that have 14 mechanisms to cause cancer.
Q: Radicals, we ask about radicals.
A: Cause radicals, Non-radical agents But cancer is caused by 14 different mechanisms.
Q: But I ask about radicals, your opinion is about radicals. Not on other mechanisms, right??
A: It's not about radicals, it's not just about radicals, it's a mistake.
[....]
Q: Your review includes radicals but not only.
A: Yes.
Q Your review describes another mechanism that causes cancer that is not radical.
A: Yes, there should be, I don't remember if I wrote them.
[....]
Q: This oxidative stress causes genotoxic damage and the genetox damage is cancer, it's all cancers.
A: Yes, yes.
Q: That's your thesis. Do you say yes? Right? This is your thesis?
The Honorable Judge D. Chasdai: Is that correct? Is that the thesis?
Q: So that's why.