Day 256 - 04 Jun 96 - Page 48
1 right-hand side, there is a paragraph which starts, "Other
2 investigations". Have you got that?
3 A. Yes, I do.
4
5 Q. "Other investigations of these data from relationships of
6 tissue antioxidant status in cancer mortality rates showed
7 that plasma ascorbate has the strongest most consistent and
8 most significant inverse associations with the various
9 cancers with the strength of these associations being
10 substantially greater for males than for females.
11
12 When plasma ascorbate was compared with mortality rates for
13 all cancers, Pearson correlations were R equals minus .43
14 for males and R equals minus .14 (not significant) for
15 females."
16
17 Can I ask you a preliminary question borne of ignorance
18 please, Professor. What is "plasma ascorbate"?
19 A. Vitamin C.
20
21 Q. Yes.
22 A. It is an antioxidant.
23
24 Q. It is a sort of ascorbic acid, is it?
25 A. Yes. Sometimes it appears as the salt form.
26
27 Q. And it recommends a Vitamin C in the plasma?
28 A. That is right, an antioxidant.
29
30 Q. Have you discovered a reason why the relationship between
31 the cancers and absence of plasma ascorbate was different
32 in males and females, significant in males but not in
33 females?
34 A. No, we have not discovered that.
35
36 Q. Is it not rather peculiar?
37 A. I suspect so. I mean, this is one study. It was
38 inverse in the same direction but it was not significant as
39 a number here indicated, what was it .14?
40
41 Q. Yes, .14 not significant?
42 A. It is in the right direction but it is not significant.
43
44 Q. Could the explanation be that the Chinese men smoked more
45 than the Chinese women did?
46 A. Yes.
47
48 Q. Those are the sort of things -- and I am not teaching my
49 grandmother to suck eggs -- which you must weave into your
50 studies before you reach conclusions, are they not?
51 A. Yes, there are and they generally are. I do not see
52 that I have reference here to what in fact were controlled
53 in these analyses.
54
55 Q. I do not either.
56 A. I would have to go back to the original paper but we do
57 this kind of thing fairly routinely and I would be
58 surprised if we did not in fact in this case.
59
60 Q. Did you get a chance to read that paper published recently
