This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (1)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Mike Mitka

JAMA. 2000;283:992.

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

Scientific journals and independent research organizations tend to judiciously guard their findings from inappropriate commercial use by companies hoping to tout their products or show up their competitors. Sometimes the lengths to which such companies go may seem surprising.

For example, the Florida Department of Citrus ran commercial advertisements last year implying endorsement by the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) of the benefits of orange juice consumption (JAMA. 1999;282:1233-1239). This prompted a letter to Florida from a lawyer at the American Medical Association that resulted in the dropping of JAMA's name from the advertisements.

But sometimes, the clear waters of a "no commercialization" policy become muddied, especially when stirred by companies who stand to benefit, or lose, from research results.

In the October issue of its journal Health Devices, Plymouth Meeting, Pa–based ECRI published an "update evaluation" of needlestick-prevention devices . . . [Full Text of this Article]

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

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Avalanches, Air Pockets, and Advertisements
Fontanarosa and Rennie
JAMA 2000;283:2293-2294.
FULL TEXT