http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2005/08/editor-in-chief-of-jama-is-receiving.html Tue, 14 Feb 2012 22:28:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2005/08/editor-in-chief-of-jama-is-receiving.html#comment-54785 jb Fri, 26 Aug 2005 11:11:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2005/08/18800.html#comment-54785 #1- What he (Anon above) said.<br/>#2- This is "hate mail"??? "You should get a real job!" That will take years of therapy to get over.<br/>#3- They did not disclose that one of the authors was a former NARAL worker, yet this was deemd insignificant. Imagine if the article had come to the opposite conclusion and one of the authors were a radical pro-lifer. #1- What he (Anon above) said.
#2- This is “hate mail”??? “You should get a real job!” That will take years of therapy to get over.
#3- They did not disclose that one of the authors was a former NARAL worker, yet this was deemd insignificant. Imagine if the article had come to the opposite conclusion and one of the authors were a radical pro-lifer.

]]> http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2005/08/editor-in-chief-of-jama-is-receiving.html#comment-54783 Anonymous Fri, 26 Aug 2005 05:16:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2005/08/18800.html#comment-54783 Considering the source of the article in question, and the multitude of observations of neonatologists, pediatric cardiologists, and others' observations of severely pre-term infants (as early as 22 weeks) and their response to the stimuli they receive during their care, the conclusions of the article are extremely suspect. It should not have been admitted to JAMA. Considering the source of the article in question, and the multitude of observations of neonatologists, pediatric cardiologists, and others’ observations of severely pre-term infants (as early as 22 weeks) and their response to the stimuli they receive during their care, the conclusions of the article are extremely suspect. It should not have been admitted to JAMA.

]]>