- Jacob F de Wolff, senior house officer, general medicine (jfdwolff@doctors.org.uk)
- Enfield EN2 8JL
EDITOR—As Ravnskov et al state,1 any revision of targets needs to be evidence based and responsible, taking into account the risks and benefits of such a measure. However, some of the authors' assertions are unclear and potentially misleading.
They do not explain in what way lowering coenzyme Q10 is harmful. The study of Rundek et al, one of …
Sign in
Personal subscribers, sign in here:
Article access
Article access for 1 day
Purchase this article for £20 $30 €32*
The PDF version can be downloaded as your personal record
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Reddit
Technorati
Twitter
Stumbleupon
Rapid responses
Latest Responses
Re: Sir Karl Popper, swans, and the general practitioner
Published 6 February 2012
The TBAS cost effectiveness is not proven beyond the experimental contest
Published 6 February 2012
Re: Why legislation is necessary for my health reforms
Published 6 February 2012
Re: Dual renin-angiotensin system blockade
Published 6 February 2012
Re: Why legislation is necessary for my health reforms
Published 6 February 2012
Most responses
Does anyone understand the government’s plan for the NHS? (17 responses)
Published 17 Jan 2012
Bad medicine: medical nutrition (15 responses)
Published 18 Jan 2012
Wakefield sues BMJ over MMR articles (5 responses)
Published 10 Jan 2012
Why legislation is necessary for my health reforms (5 responses)
Published 1 Feb 2012
Scientific misconduct is worryingly prevalent in the UK, shows BMJ survey (4 responses)
Published 12 Jan 2012