Adv. Mr. D. Or Chen: Yes.
The Honorable Judge D. Chasdai: Thank you sir. Please, Mr. Goren.
Q: Brought.
The Honorable Judge D. Chasdai: If he says it's not about synergism, great, but he wants to know because he took it right here when he asked him her name and now I'm not going to mess it up, MontebidianSo he took it here, he directed it to the page 52. Please. I try to be alert, I know, it's not easy.
A: So now what is the question about, let's see again?
Q: Why did you bring it as evidence of synergism, you told us that it's right, it's true, that it's not about synergism at all. Why did you bring it as evidence of synergism, as evidence of synergism, or not?
A: So let's see... Here, wait..
Q: If you want to say that you didn't bring it as evidence of synergism, then okay, we'll forgive you.
A: I brought here a reference from the Sea and Lakes Authority, they Relying on an article by Avital, who explained that the Kishon was a biological desert for 30 years, as I said, and they show the harsh consequences, the damage caused by the DNA breakage by the contaminant cocktail.
The Honorable Judge D. Chasdai: That was not a question, Mr. Dr. Shalita. He asks if this article by the Water and Lakes Authority is related to the subject of The Synergy. between the various materials.
A: He, I'm not sure he's specifying that it's really synergy, but he talks about a lot of damage. (pp. 197-199).
- With regard to the claim of possible 'synergy' raised by the Applicants' experts, Gad Rennert – the expert on behalf of the Respondents – was asked and answered as follows:
Adv. Mr. D. Or Chen: You agree with the issue of synergy that Dr. Shalita and Professor Shai Lin talk about in their opinion, which basically means that one carcinogen plus transportation plus another carcinogen, 3, 3 factors, let's say, are more than 3. They are 4 or 5, because there is synergy and the synergy creates an intensification of the disease.