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 Web of Science (5)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

A Clash of Ethics and Law

George D. Lundberg, MD

JAMA. 1993;270(21):2608.

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

What should be done about breast implants?^1,2

Sometimes competent, informed, and caring physicians come down on opposite sides on a matter of science and practice. In this week's JAMA, the Council on Scientific Affairs and the House of Delegates of the AMA clash fundamentally with the commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration on the issue of silicone gel breast implants. The AMA, speaking for physicians and the full use of patients' informed consent, opts for free choice.³ The FDA, speaking for law and the public's health, states an entirely different point of view.⁴

See also pp 2602 and 2607.

With silicone, women are the beneficiaries or the victims, depending on how you tally the huge number of satisfied patients or the large number of adverse effects. Everything we do in life or medicine has associated risks. Literally, "you pays your money and you takes your choice." . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Footnotes
Dr Lundberg is the editor of JAMA.

Reprint requests to JAMA, 515 N State St, Chicago, IL 60610 (Dr Lundberg).

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