This Article  • References  • 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  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Thomas C. LaBorde, MD
Lafayette, La

JAMA. 1993;270(21):2558.

	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.

—I feel compelled to comment on the misrepresentations and misinformation included in the article entitled "Court-Ordered Reimbursement for Unproven Medical Technology: Circumventing Technology Assessment" by Ferguson et al.¹ More important, the l

Thermography is likened to Laetrile (amygdalin) and immunoaugmentive therapy as having "been assessed as not safe, not effective, or inadequately evaluated." Yet, thermography has been declared safe by the Food and Drug Administration (Victor Zafra, written communication, March 12,1982), considered as useful by the American Medical Association Council on Scientific Affairs² in the evaluation of certain neuromusculoskeletal conditions, and effective by the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation³ in the evaluation of reflex sympathetic dystrophy. In contrast, similar support for Laetrile and immunoaugmentive therapy by organizations does not exist. Ferguson et al create the false perception that thermography is some type of unproven, fringe technology when in fact it is not. . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

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