No answer from authors
I am very surprised not to have got an answer from the authors of this publication http://www.bmj.com/content/351/bmj.h3942/
My rapid response underlines the proximity of a scientific misconduct because the nutritional part of the study never ever was a prospective or follow-up-study as the authors say in their abstract ["Design - Population based prospective cohort study"] and in their original article ["During a median follow-up of 7.2 years (interquartile range 1.84 years; total person years 3 500 004)..."].
The "baseline questionnaire" only was controlled by "about 5% randomly chosen surviving participants in 10 survey sites [and] were resurveyed during August and October of 2008". The analysis of the total and cause specific mortality was conducted as the authors say by the "Linkage to local health insurance databases has been achieved for about 95% of the participants in 2013".
Nutritional habits of the participants of the study were not systematically re-analysed for at least 5 up to 9 years because they "were enrolled between 2004 and 2008".
Competing interests: No competing interests