This letter is associated with the following article:
Letters
Thursday, December 7, 2006 12:00 AM

Glaxo's guinea pigs

The pharma giant is accused of putting pregnant women at risk in unethical drug trials.
Carol Lloyd

Read other letters about this article

  • Thursday, December 7, 2006 08:17 AM

    Why don't they ever define "defects?"

    Why is it that whenever I read an article (such as this one) that mentions "birth defects" as a result of some drug or other factor, it never specifies what KIND of defects? Are we talking about a relatively mild condition that can easily be remedied by modern medicine, or a truly life-altering tragedy? In other words, what kind of cost-benefit analysis is being applied in terms of danger to the mother if she DOESN'T take the substance, vs. potential and degree of danger to the baby if she DOES?

    —Anonymous

    Flag
Read other letters about this article

Most Active Letters Threads

405

I'm thankful I'm not President Obama

Backers deride Katrina-style negligence, haters hate him more each day. Can this presidency be saved? Of course
Joan Walsh Read article
320

Greg Craig and Obama's worsening civil liberties record

A new Time account of the fall of Obama's White House counsel sheds much light on rule of law issues.
Glenn Greenwald Read article
315

Tough-guy John Bolton, hiding under his bed

As usual, right-wing pseudo-warriors are drowning in extreme cowardice.
Glenn Greenwald Read article
153

Phil Carter's resignation from key detainee policy post

Many of the "War on Terror" policies he spent years condemning were ones expressly embraced by Obama.
Glenn Greenwald Read article
85

The wrong response to ClimateGate

Whining about malicious invasions of privacy won't cut it in the war over global warming science
Andrew Leonard Read article

View all »

Letters Help

Currently in Salon