This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (13)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Godfrey P. Oakley, Jr, MD

JAMA. 1982;247(17):2405.

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

Last year Jick and colleagues¹ reported a cohort study of 4,665 patients from the Group Health Cooperative (GHC), Seattle, suggesting that presumed spermicide users had infants with a higher rate of malformations than presumed nonusers. They found a twofold increase in major malformations and specific increases for Down's syndrome, limb reduction deformities, and hypospadias. An increase was also noted for neoplasms. The authors themselves considered the data tentative because no well-defined syndrome was found among the infants of users. The diversity of the increased malformations is another strong reason to consider the findings tentative.

There are other reasons to consider the findings tentative or preliminary. One must have reservations about the accuracy with which infants were classified as exposed or unexposed. An infant was considered exposed if his mother had had a prescription filled by the GHC pharmacy within 600 days of birth. Although this definition is free of . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
Birth Defects Branch Chronic Diseases Division Center for Environmental Health Centers for Disease Control Atlanta

Footnotes
Address editorial communications to the Editor, 535 N Dearborn St, Chicago, IL 60610.

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