177 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11661627)
1. Laetrile: statutory and constitutional limitations on the regulation of ineffective drugs.
Univ PA Law Rev; 1978 Nov; 127(1):233-72. PubMed ID: 11661627
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Supreme Court enters quarrel over Laetrile.
Mintz M
Washington Post; 1979 Jan; ():A1+. PubMed ID: 11648744
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. The uncertain application of the right of privacy in personal medical decisions: the Laetrile cases.
Christensen J
Ohio State Law J; 1981; 42(2):523-50. PubMed ID: 11649547
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Freedom of choice in medical treatment: reconsidering the efficacy requirement of the FDCA.
Clinite BJ
Loyola Univ Chic Law J; 1977; 9(1):205-26. PubMed ID: 11661566
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Laetrile: individual choice for cancer patients.
Block RE
Rev Law Soc Change; 1978; 7(2):313-34. PubMed ID: 11661706
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Laetrile and the privacy right in decisional responsibility.
Volzer HJ
Med Trial Tech Q; 1980; 27(4):395-429. PubMed ID: 11662802
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Laetrile: the battle moves into the courtroom.
Schwartz RL
Am Bar Assoc J; 1979 Feb; 65():224-8. PubMed ID: 11661617
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Administrative law... Laetrile and other drugs to be used by the terminally ill are not exempt from the safety and effectiveness requirements of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938.
Shishkovsky KR
J Urban Law; 1980; 57(2):364-88. PubMed ID: 11662840
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Rutherford v. United States. 5 Dec 1977.
U.S. District Court, W.D. Oklahoma
Fed Suppl; 1977; 438():1287-302. PubMed ID: 11645965
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Regulating Laetrile: constitutional and statutory implications.
Patton-Hulce VR
Univ Dayton Law Rev; 1980; 5(1):155-76. PubMed ID: 11661910
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. High court ducks two issues, leaving Laetrile unchecked.
Med World News; 1979 Jul; 20(14):17+. PubMed ID: 11645407
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. The right of privacy in choosing medical treatment: should terminally ill persons have access to drugs not yet approved by the Food and Drug Administration?
Power SH
John Marshall Law Rev; 1987; 20(4):693-714. PubMed ID: 11650094
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Rutherford v. United States. 19 Feb 1980.
U.S. Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
Fed Report; 1980; 616():455-7. PubMed ID: 11645969
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Drugs--Federal Drug Administration ban on Laetrile treatments for terminally ill cancer patients is arbitrary and capricious.
Bitting TH
Tulsa Law J; 1978; 14():222-5. PubMed ID: 11662799
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. The judicial dilemma of Laetrile and a possible solution.
Pendergast WR
Mercer Law Rev; 1979; 30(3):573-84. PubMed ID: 11661827
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. People v. Privitera: the right to prescribe and use Laetrile.
Brandt EK
West State Univ Law Rev; 1978; 5(2):201-229. PubMed ID: 11661590
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. The Laetrile controversy: freedom of choice in medicines urged.
Link M
Congr Q Wkly Rep; 1977 Jul; 35(27):1346-8. PubMed ID: 11661613
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. The right to choose an unproven method of treatment.
Unan VA
Loyola Los Angel Law Rev; 1979 Dec; 13(1):227-45. PubMed ID: 11662827
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Laetrile: may the state intervene on behalf of a minor?
Ainsworth MV; Wall T
Univ Kans Law Rev; 1982; 30(3):409-28. PubMed ID: 12083079
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Why Laetrile won't go away.
Edson L
N Y Times Mag; 1977 p 41+; 27 Nov 1977():. PubMed ID: 11662576
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
