Day 256 - 04 Jun 96 - Page 53
1 A. Could I explain?
2
3 Q. Yes, I think you should because I have 2 ----
4
5 MR. RAMPTON: My Lord, the (b) is adjusted only for energy
6 intake so one can ignore that.
7
8 MR. JUSTICE BELL: What is the figure? The column which you have
9 drawn attention to which starts with "1.2 for total fat",
10 what is the little note against "adjusted RR" there.
11
12 MR. RAMPTON: My Lord, that is the last entry before the double
13 asterisk, and I am afraid I cannot tell you which one it
14 is. But what it says is ----
15
16 MR. JUSTICE BELL: But what is it? Is it a C, a D, an E or
17 what? I cannot read it at all.
18
19 MR. RAMPTON: No. It must, I think, be an E because we have had
20 D, and what it must be is the last entry, as I say, before
21 the single and then the double asterisk in the note:
22 "Adjustment has been made for energy intake and
23 non-dietary risk factors in Shanghai and Tianjin as listed
24 above". It is a guess, my Lord, but since it is a total,
25 that would seem to make sense.
26
27 What I do not know is whether it is a readjustment, a
28 recalculation or not, but maybe the Professor can tell us
29 if he knows about it.
30
31 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Can you see any explanation?
32 A. If we can go back to capture the main points. As you
33 can see, the first 4 columns are for Shanghai, and the next
34 4 are for Tianjin, and of course the next 4 are for total.
35 We all understand that. Within those blocks, we have got
36 a relative risk, secondly, an adjusted relative risk with a
37 footnote, and, thirdly, a second adjusted relative risk
38 with another footnote for each of these 3 blocks of data.
39
40 Q. So if I look under "Shanghai", the adjusted relative risk,
41 that should be a note D as it should under Tianjin, should
42 it? I can read the D under Tianjin.
43
44 MR. RAMPTON: No, my Lord.
45
46 THE WITNESS: I think it is C under "Shanghai".
47
48 MR. RAMPTON: It is C, my Lord. It is the end of the third line
49 of the note.
50
51 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I see, yes. I see reading the note.
52
53 MR. RAMPTON: It is the secondary note which takes non-dietary
54 factors as well as energy intake into account.
55
56 THE WITNESS: Yes. In any case, what is happening here is if
57 you look at the relative risk itself, for which there is no
58 adjustment, then it can be an effect of fat as well as an
59 effect of these other things, so adjustments are made and
60 the first adjustment, the second column in each case, and
