Day 252 - 20 May 96 - Page 27


     
     1        again, but the abstract, which is very short, from the
     2        article, the punch of it after all the figures is that the
     3        authors conclude that the NCEP2 diet has a beneficial
     4        effect, and then it says why.  Because it decreases SF to
     5        less than 100 -- what is the PP?
     6        A.   This is postprandial. This is after the meal.
     7
     8   Q.   To less than 100 postprandial triglycerides which may be
     9        atherogenic?
    10        A.   May I explain, your Lordship, what this really means
    11        here?
    12
    13   Q.   Yes.
    14        A.   This, again, is a somewhat outdated way of expressing
    15        things.  The SF greater than 100 and the SF 20-100 refers
    16        to two fractions of triglycerides in the blood which are
    17        separated by a process of spinning them in a centrifuge,
    18        and this technique was developed by a man called Sedberg,
    19        hence SF.  He is seeing mortality being reduced to the
    20        level of an abbreviation, but Sedberg is the man who
    21        invented the technique and these two fractions are a
    22        heavier fraction of triglycerides and a lighter fraction.
    23        Nowadays, we talk about very low lipoproteins -- that is
    24        the modern terminology -- but what they have shown here or,
    25        claim to have shown here, is that following the ingestion
    26        of this meal that the rate of removal of one of these
    27        triglyceride fractions, the heavier one, which is the SF
    28        greater than a hundred, that the concentration of that
    29        remained higher in the blood for a longer period than it
    30        did when the subjects were on the healthy diet and they
    31        suggest that this is not a desirable thing and it may be
    32        related to coronary heart disease.  That is on opinion of
    33        the author, but it is not a widely held opinion that any
    34        triglycerides action has anything to do with the
    35        atherosclerosic process.
    36
    37   Q.   The author only says that they may be atherogenic?
    38        A.  Yes, what he does not say, your Honour, is that on the
    39        other hand they may not, which most people do not say.
    40
    41   Q.   Well, into 'may', which he uses both in his letter and
    42        which is used in the abstract, if it may be, it supposes
    43        that it may not be?
    44        A.  Absolutely, yes.
    45
    46   Q.   But you do not have to say 'may not'.  If you say 'may' it
    47        countenances the possibility that it may not be so?
    48        A.   Yes.  This is something that happens frequently in
    49        COMA reports where they make a statement that something or
    50        other like sugar may encourage excessive energy intakes. I 
    51        object to that because I feel it should say on the other 
    52        hand it may not, but this is quoted by other people as 
    53        saying the COMA report says that sugar encourages excessive
    54        energy intakes.  It is misquoted.
    55
    56   Q.   I do not think you need explain to a lawyer 'may' and
    57        'will' and is 'likely to'?
    58        A.   Yes.
    59
    60   Q.   But do you join issue with the statement that SF more than

Prev Next Index