This is old news as you can see from the date, but I cannot ever remember seeing any reference to this in the PJ. There also only appears to be a few people (7) who replied to it, which I always found interesting. What do others think of this? Is it acceptable to put point 5 alongside the others? Is point 5 in itself not worthy of an official response? Like I say I know it's old news, but I have always wondered what others thought of this.
http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/conte...l/321/7266/913
http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/conte...l/321/7266/913
Comment