These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
159 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11646822)
1. Judge backs Gulf use of unapproved drugs. N Y Times Web; 1991 Feb; ():A9. PubMed ID: 11646822 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Experimental drugs are linked to ills of Gulf War veterans. Leary WE N Y Times Web; 1994 May; ():12. PubMed ID: 11647031 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. A military exception to "informed consent": Doe v. Sullivan. Moran PJ St Johns Law Rev; 1993; 66(3):847-63. PubMed ID: 11652729 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Walking a thin line: distinguishing between research and medical practice during Operation Desert Storm. Schuchardt EJ Columbia J Law Soc Probl; 1992; 26(1):77-115. PubMed ID: 11651647 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. The ethics of troop vaccination. N Y Times Web; 1991 Jan; ():A22. PubMed ID: 11646805 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Informed consent and investigational new drug abuses in the U.S. military. Cummings ML Account Res; 2002; 9(2):93-103. PubMed ID: 12625353 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Justiciability--waiving for the flag: should informed consent rules apply in the context of military emergencies? Seftel SB George Washington Law Rev; 1992 Jun; 60(5):1387-435. PubMed ID: 16086522 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Informed consent for human drugs and biologics; determination that informed consent is not feasible; interim rule and opportunity for public comment. U.S. Food and Drug Administration Fed Regist; 1990 Dec; 55(246):52814-7. PubMed ID: 11645686 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Doe v. Sullivan. U.S. Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit Fed Report; 1991 Jul; 938():1370-86. PubMed ID: 11648219 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The front lines of biowarfare: today's anti-terrorism effort casts early test subjects in new light. Snyder D Washington Post; 2003 May; ():B1, B5. PubMed ID: 12812180 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Gulf War guinea pigs: is informed consent optional during war? Milner CA J Contemp Health Law Policy; 1996; 13(1):199-232. PubMed ID: 9068242 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Japan's germ warriors: plumbing the horrors of 'Devil's Brigade'. Dahlby T Washington Post; 1983 May; ():A1, A25. PubMed ID: 11646126 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Protecting soldiers from friendly fire: the consent requirement for using investigational drugs and vaccines in combat. Annas GJ Am J Law Med; 1998; 24(2-3):245-60. PubMed ID: 9702274 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Porton defends nerve-gas tests on humans. Mason I New Sci; 1987 Jul; 115(1569):30. PubMed ID: 11655830 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Pact with Japan hid results of germ war tests on POWs. Hilts PJ Washington Post; 1981 Oct; ():A3. PubMed ID: 11646213 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Japanese germ-war atrocities: a half-century of stonewalling the world. Blumenthal R; Miller J N Y Times Web; 1999 Mar; ():A12. PubMed ID: 11648104 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. FDA seeks public comment on informed consent rules in combat situations. Hastings Cent Rep; 1997; 27(5):43. PubMed ID: 11645003 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. U.S. troops were subjected to a wider toxic testing. Shanker T N Y Times Web; 2002 Oct; ():A18. PubMed ID: 12474840 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Military medical research: 1. Are there ethical exceptions? Levine C IRB; 1989; 11(4):5-7. PubMed ID: 11650244 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Waivers for military use of investigational agents. Poikonen J; McCart GM; Veatch RM Am J Hosp Pharm; 1991 Jul; 48(7):1525; discussion 1525-9. PubMed ID: 1882884 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]