This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

To the Editor.— In their report on contamination of poliovirus vaccine with simian virus 40 (SV40), Dr Strickler and colleagues¹ mistakenly claim that "earlier studies of cancer risk following exposure to SV40-contaminated vaccine were generally limited by small sample size or short follow-up." I refute this suggestion and contend that my report,² which they include in this group, neither was of limited sample size nor was it a short follow-up as arguably the others they refer to were.

The sample totaled 810 children with malignant disease observed during 10 years in 2 major Australian hospitals and was not construed as limited in size or follow-up by either the reviewers or Editor of Nature . To include this report with the others Strickler et al consider limited and small is merely their perception, which conflicts with reality. The survey showed a significant association between the immunization with Salk vaccine and childhood . . . [Full Text of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLE

Contamination of Poliovirus Vaccines With Simian Virus 40 (1955-1963) and Subsequent Cancer Rates
, , , , , and
JAMA. ;279():292-295.
FULL TEXT