Day 256 - 04 Jun 96 - Page 45


     
     1        A.  OK.  It is about the same -- no, it is not.  Wait a
     2        minute.  If you using relative risk as sort of a
     3        measurement index, then something less than about 0.8,
     4        I think, somewhere in that territory.
     5
     6   Q.   So, anything below about 0.5 would be significant,
     7        certainly?
     8        A.  Well, something -- often times below about 0.8 is
     9        significant.
    10
    11   Q.   Can we look at the next bit of this paper, which moves from
    12        breast cancer to colon cancer or large bowel cancer?  You
    13        write, you and your colleague:
    14
    15        "Intakes of 14 complex carbohydrates and fibre fractions
    16        were obtained in this study to determine whether particular
    17        fibre fractions were associated to particular diseases,
    18        especially cancers of the large bowel.  Average dietary
    19        fibre intake in China was about three times higher than
    20        average US intake, with one county mean being high as
    21        77 grammes per day.  So far we have prepared only a brief
    22        report of these data."
    23
    24        Has there been an update since then, do you know?
    25        A.  Somewhat, but not fully published.
    26
    27   Q.   Then it reads on:
    28
    29        "However, based on an overview of the univariate
    30        correlations, colon and rectal cancer mortality rates were
    31        consistently inversely correlated with all fibre and
    32        complex carbohydrates fractions except for pectin, which
    33        showed no correlation.  These relationships, although
    34        consistent, appeared rather weak because only
    35        rhamnose-containing complex carbohydrates intakes reached
    36        statistical significance for cancer of the colon. It
    37        appears, then, that within the range of 7 to 77 grammes of
    38        fibre per day, where mean intakes of 29 of the 65 counties
    39        were above the upper US recommendation in the 30 to 35
    40        grammes of fibre per day, there is evidence of a weak
    41        inverse relationship between cancer of the large bowel and
    42        the intake of multiple complex carbohydrate and dietary
    43        fibre fractions."
    44
    45        So far as those fractions are concerned -- and I do not
    46        know what they were -- but so far as those were concerned,
    47        have you had any reason to revise the view which is
    48        expressed in this part of this paper?
    49        A.  No.
    50 
    51   Q.   So, if a protective effect of eating plants is to be found, 
    52        it must lie elsewhere in the various nutrients which make 
    53        up the plant?
    54        A.  Sure, of course, but, yes, not exclusively.  I mean,
    55        the dietary fibre contribution -- keep in mind that these
    56        numbers here that you just referred to are numbers in
    57        excess of 35 grammes a day.  35 grammes a day, quite
    58        frankly, is already three times higher than what is
    59        consistently consumed here in the US.  So we are talking
    60        about intakes that are very high.  When we get that high,

Prev Next Index