3 ms·
>Denmark’s mandatory elimination of ITFA accounted for approximately 11% of the substantial reduction in CHD deaths observed between 1991 and 2007. Its very si
by tokai 4y ago
>Denmark’s mandatory elimination of ITFA accounted for approximately 11% of the substantial reduction in CHD deaths observed between 1991 and 2007.
Its very simple. 11% of the reduction in congenital CHD in the time period is due to the ban of trans fat.
- bjornsing 4y agoSo… That does not in any way clarify things. Is the parent right or wrong?
- junofan 4y agoWrong. See tables 1 and 2.
- tokai 4y agoSeriously? The conclusion I quoted is easy unconvoluted language. I cannot imagine what could be changed to make it more understandable. Over a period you have a reduction of the total deaths due to CHD - 11% of that reduction is due to a ban on trans fat.
- happyopossum 4y agoIt may be clear to you, but it's missing some context - it's 11% of the 75%, so really an overall 8% reduction. Using the number of 11% instead of 8% could be construed as trying to hype up the results.
- oliwarner 4y agoThe overall decrease is 74% (adjusting previous rates for population increases). 14,993 expected deaths → 3,883 actual. Transfat ban is credited with 11% of that reduction so "only" an 8% reduction overall. Still massively significant, but not to the point of the silly headline.
- sokoloff 4y agoIn this paper, CHD is used as an abbreviation for coronary heart disease, not congenital heart defects.