Arguments in editorial were not “biologically implausible”BMJ 1999; 319 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.319.7201.57 (Published 03 July 1999) Cite this as: BMJ 1999;319:57
- Klim McPherson, Professor of public health epidemiology (email@example.com)
- Cancer and Public Health Unit, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London WC1E 7HT
EDITOR—In a news article Woodman reports that “controversy about the contraceptive pill and its effect on the risk of breast cancer was rekindled” in an editorial that I wrote in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health.1 The editorial was intended in part to reduce undue complacency about the safety of the pill. Ex cathedra statements by Professor John Guillebaud in Woodman's article—that my argument “is biologically implausible”—need to be well justified, since …
Log in using your username and password
Log in through your institution
Register for a free trial to thebmj.com to receive unlimited access to all content on thebmj.com for 14 days.
Sign up for a free trial