Day 256 - 04 Jun 96 - Page 51
1
2 Q. Now, they have analysed the data for total protein and they
3 come out with a relative risk for the whole lot of 0.8; do
4 you see that?
5 A. Yes.
6
7 Q. It does not implicate protein very strongly.
8
9 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Where -- yes, I see, in the right.
10
11 MR. RAMPTON: I am sorry, my Lord, I should have gone more
12 slowly.
13
14 Shanghai and Tianjin are in total. Each adjusted, and
15 I will come to the adjustments in a moment. Protein does
16 not come out very strongly as a suspect in the genesis of
17 breast cancer according to these data; does it?
18 A. That is correct.
19
20 Q. If you look at fat, which is the next block down: Soya
21 protein and soya total protein, whatever the difference may
22 be, total fat, saturated fat, mono saturated fat, and
23 polyunsaturated fat all coming out at just over one in the
24 total column, yes?
25 A. Yes.
26
27 Q. Again, statistically quite insignificant; is that right?
28 A. Yes. Those total figures of course are aggregates of
29 the total two city data and in contrast if you look at the
30 individual relative risk for each of the cities, you can
31 see that with Tianjin, for example, those relative risks
32 were all quite significant.
33
34 Q. Apart from polyunsaturated fat?
35 A. Well, even that one is significant.
36
37 Q. It goes the other way?
38 A. The PO5. No it is not, it is 3.5.
39
40 Q. You must have a better copy than me because the adjusted
41 relative risk look like a 0.5 to me.
42
43 MR. JUSTICE BELL: 3.5 I think it is.
44
45 MR. RAMPTON: Is it?
46
47 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Yes.
48
49 MR. RAMPTON: I am not following that, I am afraid, under
50 "Tianjin" it should be the column immediately under the
51 word "Tianjin"?
52 A. The order is kind of confusing here. They have got the
53 relative risks and adjusted relative risks in the first and
54 second columns of each city. Usually it is the other way
55 round but, in any case, reading across here ----
56
57 Q. I think if one -- I am sorry, but this is very difficult
58 because I can hardly read the footnote but "adjusted
59 relative risk" with a D on it adjusted for energy intake in
60 northern dietary risk factors in Tianjin, which included
