This is essentially the same as replying "no u". The risk results in question are clear and numerically comparable on their own. It's not a complex diagnosis, a

This is essentially the same as replying "no u". The risk results in question are clear and numerically comparable on their own. It's not a complex diagnosis, analysis, or treatment issue that would require a specialist's medical opinion. All you need is the knowledge of someone who understands basic arithmetic, statistics, and logic. This is not editorialising. This is not misrepresenting data or reports to mislead. I welcome you to try again - preferably with a point beyond "no u" next time.