eLetters

145 e-Letters

published between 2004 and 2007

  • Introduction to the Olivieri Symposium – Don’t fudge the ethics
    Brenda L. Gallie

    Dear editor,

    The Introduction[1] to the very welcome Olivieri Symposium focuses on a “timeline of the most salient events”. Unfortunately, Viens and Savulescu left out several events of fundamental ethical concern and accepted some “facts” that are highly questionable. Most surprisingly, they have fallen into a common error: emphasising the scientific argument, when that is not their expertise, and bypassing the funda...

    Show More
  • What would you do Doctor?
    L Duvika Mewasingh

    Dear Editor

    The paper by J Harris is well thought out and certainly discusses one of the most difficult issues a doctor may face; this includes not only breaking bad news but also helping his/her patients with any ensuing decisions regarding 'end of life decisions'. As a paediatrician, one faces the additional difficulty that one's patient is often unable to voice his/her wishes or feelings. When faced with hav...

    Show More
  • EBP misrepresentation
    David J Brookman

    Dear Editor

    I have read the recent theme issue on evidence based medicine and the various articles have raised some disquiet, mainly because they seem to be applying a concept of evidence based practice which assumes centralised imposition of rules, rather than the generally accepted concept of seeking and analysing the best evidence, using clinical judgment and adapting these to the patients wishes,

    Most...

    Show More
  • United we gain, divided we lose: A response to ‘The Olivieri symposium’.
    Dr V Mohanan Nair

    Dear Editor

    Professor F. Baylis in her symposium on the ‘Olivieri debacle’ examines a highly debated controversy.[1]

    I would like to look at the developments from a different angle. Olivieri debacle, to me, is an example of a crisis where academia, researchers and the bioethicists worked in unison for a common noble cause.

    The situation that the author tries to portray as "a proud moment in time...

    Show More
  • Reponse to McIntyre
    Edzard Ernst

    Dear Editor

    Re: Ethical problems arising in evidencebased complementary and alternative medicine Edzard Ernst, Michael H. Cohen, Julie Stone

    Mr McIntyre [1] rightly states that, in the UK, initiatives are underway to regulate acupuncturists and herbalists. At the time of writing this letter, a draft document is circulating. At the time of writing the actual article (about one year ago), these initiat...

    Show More
  • Response to Symposium on consent and confidentiality
    Jan Schildmann

    Dear Editor

    Regarding the Symposium on consent and confidentiality.[1]

    We read with interest the recent papers on informed consent published in a recent edition of the JME.[1] Whatever their differences, and however much they questioned some aspects of the duty to respect autonomy through attempting to obtain informed consent for therapeutic interventions, there was a general agreement that competent adult...

    Show More
  • Reply to 'Differences in medical students'
    - Medical School Council

    Dear Editor

    We write in response to the original article “Differences in medical students’ attitudes to academic misconduct and reported behaviour across the years-a questionnaire study” by Rennie and Rudland published in this journal April 2003 edition.[1] Current and former Dundee Medical School students are concerned at the media misinterpretation of the study and the consequences that this branding of “disho...

    Show More
  • Reponse to the Olivieri Symposium
    Paula Chidwick

    Dear Editor:

    We would like to thank the authors and editors of the JME’s mini- symposium on the Olivieri case for continuing and extending the dialogue about this important challenge to the North American bioethics community.

    This mini-symposium is of special interest to us as members of the Canadian Bioethics Society’s “Working Group on Employment Standards for Bioethics.” We are members of this Workin...

    Show More
  • Reply to response from Levy
    Bennett M Foddy

    Dear Editor

    I very much like Levy’s first argument in his letter of response[1]:

    ‘[I]t is false to think that in all cases in which X is worse off as a result of Y's actions, X has had her rights violated by Y.’

    Levy makes a good point that members of society are not discriminating against the deaf, when they use the spoken word and audible alarms, and so forth, as part of their everyday lives. Nobody...

    Show More
  • Positive developments in CAM in the UK
    Michael J McIntyre

    Dear Editor

    I am surprised by glaring omissions in your article, Ethical problems arising in evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine by Ernst, Cohen and Stone. Their paper undoubtedly presents an outdated picture of the development of complementary and alternative Medicine (CAM) in the UK at this time

    The authors state “that providers of CAM are often not medically trained” and that “their...

    Show More

Pages