KEY POINTS:
The New Zealand Food Safety Authority pre-determined the outcome of an investigation into milk, says Lincoln University professor Keith Woodford.
There are two types of milk - A1 and A2 - which are usually mixed together.
The health concern was related to a derivative of A1 beta-casein - a gene carried by about half of New Zealand cows, which has been linked by some to heart disease, diabetes and schizophrenia.
Woodford, who has written a book on the subject, wants the industry to switch completely to A2.
Following a 2004 investigation by Deakin University professor Boyd Swinburn on behalf of the Food Safety Authority, a message of uncertainty about the safety of milk was changed to one of certainty, Woodford said.
"The reality is the document they got from Professor Swinburn did not do that.
"It said that there was not enough evidence to put a warning on milk ... but it also said there wasn't certainty in the other direction."
The outcome had been pre-determined "in the sense that they had an outcome which they wanted right form the start", he said.
But director of Food Standards Carole Inkster said while studies commissioned by the agency formed part of the risk management process, the researchers did not make decisions.
"We have never attributed the safety of milk to Professor Swinburn so there's no issue there as far as we're concerned," Inkster said. "We made that statement and we stand by it."
The agency held a position before the investigation that both A1 and A2 milk were safe to consume, she said.
"We had always been of a view that milk was a nutritious food and we were prepared to change that if the report showed that it wasn't and in our view the report identified that the science was inconclusive."
An ongoing relationship with the dairy industry represented in large part by Fonterra should not be a surprise, Inkster said.
"It's not an unusual situation and in most circumstances some part of NZFSA would be talking with Fonterra weekly, daily at times."
Fonterra had taken the initiative to suggest some names for the peer review of Swinburn's investigation, she said.
The timing of the original release to the media when Swinburn was not available had been a mistake, she added.
"It was entirely my misunderstanding of what his availability was and wasn't.'
Meanwhile, an email from Fonterra set out eight potential peer reviewers for Swinburn's report but there was no evidence that A2 Corporation had been asked to supply candidates, Woodford said.
The heading of the email as "Names" made it clear it was in response to a request from the agency, he said.
Swinburn said he had recommended that the uncertainty was conveyed by the agency "and I have to say I don't think that, that recommendation was really taken up very well by NZFSA".
"From a risk perception and a risk management point of view of course that's not easy territory to be in for an organisation like NZFSA and so there is a natural tendency I think to make things appear a bit more certain than they are."
However, he was more upset about the timing of the original media release being made when he was not available to comment.
