Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users
to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response
is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual
response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the
browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published
online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed.
Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles.
The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being
wilfully misrepresented as published articles or when it is brought to our
attention that a response spreads misinformation.
From March 2022, the word limit for rapid responses will be 600 words not
including references and author details. We will no longer post responses
that exceed this limit.
The word limit for letters selected from posted responses remains 300 words.
I read with interest your recent news articles (1) on pharmaceutical
industry's attempts to handle the HRT controversy.
The language used ("With top quality randomised controlled trials
showing HRT causes harm ...") contrasts quite dramatically with that in
your previous, disappointingly unbalanced, pro-HRT Clinical Review (2,3).
WHIMS (4) now shows that HRT apparently increases the risk of
dementia - rough NNH 113 after 4 years therapy.
Isn't it about time the BMJ revisited the HRT debate, but presenting
both sides of the argument this time?
Yours sincerely
Matthew Grove
(1) BMJ 326; 31/5/03; p.1161
(2) Janice Rymer et al. Making decisions about hormone replacement
therapy. BMJ 2003; 326: 322-326
(3) Rapid responses to Rymer et al. Access from: http://bmj.com/cgi/eletters/326/7384/322#29565
(4) Estrogen plus Progestin and the incidence of dementia and mild
cognitive impairment in Postemenopausal Women. The WHIMS. JAMA
2003;289;p2651-2662
Competing interests:
I have been sponsored to attend meetings by Wyeth, and once received an honorarium from Lilly for lecturing on osteoporosis.
People who live in glass houses ...
I read with interest your recent news articles (1) on pharmaceutical
industry's attempts to handle the HRT controversy.
The language used ("With top quality randomised controlled trials
showing HRT causes harm ...") contrasts quite dramatically with that in
your previous, disappointingly unbalanced, pro-HRT Clinical Review (2,3).
WHIMS (4) now shows that HRT apparently increases the risk of
dementia - rough NNH 113 after 4 years therapy.
Isn't it about time the BMJ revisited the HRT debate, but presenting
both sides of the argument this time?
Yours sincerely
Matthew Grove
(1) BMJ 326; 31/5/03; p.1161
(2) Janice Rymer et al. Making decisions about hormone replacement
therapy. BMJ 2003; 326: 322-326
(3) Rapid responses to Rymer et al. Access from:
http://bmj.com/cgi/eletters/326/7384/322#29565
(4) Estrogen plus Progestin and the incidence of dementia and mild
cognitive impairment in Postemenopausal Women. The WHIMS. JAMA
2003;289;p2651-2662
Competing interests:
I have been sponsored to attend meetings by Wyeth, and once received an honorarium from Lilly for lecturing on osteoporosis.
Competing interests: No competing interests