By Andrew Clark

The Times newspaper is paying the legal bills of Andrew Millar, the
former British  Biotech  research chief who was sacked in April.
Dr Millar faces a High Court action from the company for alleged
breach of confidentiality.
He says his defence costs have already passed pounds 10,000. The
Times gave him an indemnity against costs in May, in return for a
written affidavit about events at British  Biotech.  
Alastair Brett, the paper's solicitor, said: "Before he gave us an
affidavit, he insisted we indemnify him in case he was sued by
British Biotech for disclosure of information. He has, not
surprisingly, triggered that indemnity." Mr Brett said the paper
needed Dr Millar's affidavit to fight an injunction brought by the
company to prevent publication of certain details. "We wanted to
publish a matter which we thought was relevant and important for our
readers. We are obligated to look after someone, just as your paper
would be if someone gave you a good story."
Mr Brett said: "I have not the slightest doubt that we will win this
and I will have no hesitation in going after British  Biotech  for
costs." Dr Millar's lawyers have reserved the right to make a
counter-claim against British  Biotech.  They are considering
claiming pounds 90,000 for alleged wrongful dismissal and a further
pounds 90,000 in "stigma damages" - money to compensate Dr Millar if
he is unable to find another job. Dr Millar has also brought a claim
for unfair dismissal at an industrial tribunal. This would yield
maximum damages of under pounds 15,000 and an initial hearing this
week will determine whether it goes ahead before the High Court
case.
--END COPY--

thanks to
The Daily Telegraph (United Kingdom)  
August 24, 98

The bottom line it seems, with regards to biotechnology genetically
engineered foods, is that, without our consent, we are all being
used as guinea pigs by a profit driven industry, for a dangerous
technological experiment. Despite serious concerns from the
international scientific community, the CLINTON+GORE ADMINISTRATION
and WASHINGTON BUREAUCRATS still do not believe that the consumer
has the right to know what s/he is eating!!

The CONSUMER RIGHT TO KNOW initiative has united scientists,
physicians, elected officials, businesses, organizations, religious
leaders, entertainment industry members, farmers, and consumers
behind an effort to ensure mandatory labeling of genetically
engineered foods in the US. For more information, please write
Mothers for Natural Law, P.O. Box 1177, Fairfield, IA 52556, USA;
515-472-2809. Please SIGN THE PETITION at http://www.***.com/
or call toll-free 1 877 REAL cooking.net">food

More sources for authoritative informations:

--> http://www.***.com/
The ALLIANCE FOR BIO-INTEGRITY: Landmark lawsuit challenging US cooking.net">food
and Drug Administration policy on genetically engineered food:
Eminent scientists, health professionals, and religious leaders
demanding adequate safety testing and mandatory labeling: Charging
FDA with ignoring significant health risks, violating consumer
rights, and infringing religious freedom. Toll Free: 1 800 549 2131
--> http://www.***.com/ ~w-18472/indexeng.htm
PHYSICIANS AND SCIENTISTS AGAINST GENETICALLY ENGINEERED FOOD, a
growing, international network for a moratorium on release of
genetically manipulated product in our cooking.net">food supply
--> http://www.***.com/
--> http://www.***.com/

   Biotechnology does things that selective breeding does, but faster.
It also transfers genes between species, but that happens in nature
also (some viruses do it) and by mechanisms often unknown (perhaps
fungi are vectors).  For example, the swollen thorn acacia and the ants
that live upon it share a few genes.  How did that happen?  Certainly
not bioengineering. But we've long known that organisms are not "books"
of genes, but rather looseleaf binders of genes, and nature herself
swaps some pages around between them all the time.  It doesn't seem to
cause disaster in the natural world.  

                                          Steve Harris, M.D.