This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Correction  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • 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?

Neal D. Barnard, MD
Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine Washington, DC

JAMA. 1992;268(6):788-789.

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

To the Editor.

—Let me correct a statement in the December 25,1991, issue of THE JOURNAL¹ in which Dr Loeb stated that the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) had been "officially censured." Censure is used by the American Medical Association (AMA) for specific purposes, and PCRM has never been the subject of any such proceeding.

The AMA and PCRM have had strong differences. In 1989, the AMA released its Animal Research Action Plan and has devoted substantial expenditures to pushing animal experimentation. Because PCRM has successfully promoted inquiry into and alternatives to animal experimentation, the AMA is increasingly sniping at PCRM.

In 1990, the AMA House of Delegates considered a resolution brought by the California delegation that objected to PCRM for "implying that physicians who support the use of animals in biomedical research are irresponsible, for misrepresenting the critical role animals play in research and teaching, and for . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

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