[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.163.92.62. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Views 150
Citations 0
Letters
August 1, 2012

Complementary Health Practices

Author Affiliations
 

Letters Section Editor: Jody W. Zylke, MD, Senior Editor.

Author Affiliations: School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia (matthew.leach@unisa.edu.au).

JAMA. 2012;308(5):452-453. doi:10.1001/jama.2012.8159

To the Editor: Dr Offit1 presented a number of interesting points in his discussion of the value of research conducted by NCCAM. However, several warrant further discussion. First, advising NCCAM to refrain from funding studies of therapies that lack biological plausibility would be unreasonable. Such action would unnecessarily deny populations timely access to much-needed clinical evidence required to make informed health care decisions. For particularly vulnerable patient populations who might be exposed to unscrupulous health care services or practitioners, such action could have substantial implications for the health and well-being of the patient.

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview
×