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

Prev Next Index