Day 039 - 20 Oct 94 - Page 62
1 Q. So an academic whose department had received a grant, for
2 example, to fund a research student, the head of the
3 department would be in your category of those who are
4 funded by industry, would he?
5 A. I think he would, yes. That is how I intended to use
6 the expression.
7
8 Q. So, do I follow what you are trying to tell us, namely,
9 this, that, in your view, the objectivity, the scientific
10 objectivity, of all those groups of persons is so heavily
11 compromised that one cannot rely upon what they tell you;
12 is that right?
13 A. I would not quite put it in those terms, no. I would
14 not say we cannot rely on anything they say, but I think it
15 is always incumbent upon us just to check to see whether
16 there is any evidence indicating that the funding source
17 has in any way coloured the way their work is conducted and
18 analysed, interpreted or reported.
19
20 Q. Before you came to give evidence in this court,
21 Dr. Millstone, did you read the report which Professor
22 Ronald Walker of Guildford University had prepared for this
23 trial?
24 A. Yes, I did.
25
26 Q. Have you read a transcript of his evidence?
27 A. I have a copy of it. I have not -- I have skimmed it.
28 I have not read it very -- I have not had an opportunity to
29 read it word for word.
30
31 Q. Leaving the evidence on one side, taking only the report,
32 would you agree that, so far as it matters, your evidence
33 to this court and what he says in his report are in direct
34 conflict with each other?
35 A. There are points upon which Professor Walker and I are
36 in agreement in respect of particular fragments of
37 toxicological evidence but, more commonly, we disagree
38 about the ways in which those data are most appropriately
39 interpreted. We often disagree in our conclusions, though
40 from time to time we would cite the same data.
41
42 Q. In the world at large, Dr. Millstone, the use of additives
43 in food is governed by government regulations, is it not?
44 A. I think it is important to qualify that. It is
45 important to say that there are detailed specific
46 regulations governing the use of many categories of food
47 additives, but by no means all additives, and in particular
48 the larger single category of additives by value and
49 quantity, namely, flavourings, are not covered by specific
50 regulations, but the others, for the most part, are
51 including the ones at issue here, such as colours,
52 preservatives, thickening agents, antioxidants and
53 preservatives.
54
55 Q. The eight compounds -- I leave out Potassium Bromate
56 because it is no longer used in this country and it is no
57 longer used by McDonald's suppliers -- with which we are
58 concerned in this case are the subject for use as additives
59 in food, they are the subject of regulation, are they not?
60 A. They are indeed.
