To the Editor: An important and controversial article authored by Haines and Lowenthal1 was recently published in the Internal Medicine Journal. The authors challenged evidence used by Ian Gawler on his website (iangawler.com) and in his book2 to support meditation and dietary interventions as cancer therapy. Publication of the article was subsequent to initial submission to the Medical Journal of Australia, whose editors at first accepted the article but later rejected it on the grounds that Gawler did not consent to publication of the study.3 Could the editors of the MJA please inform its readers and authors why they chose to reject the article?
The full article is accessible to AMA members and paid subscribers. Login to read more or purchase a subscription now.
Please note: institutional and Research4Life access to the MJA is now provided through Wiley Online Library.
- 1. Haines IE, Lowenthal RM. Hypothesis. The importance of a histological diagnosis when diagnosing and treating advanced cancer. Famous patient recovery may not have been from metastatic disease. Intern Med J 2012; 42: 212-216.
- 2. Gawler I. You can conquer cancer. 1st ed. Rochester: Thorsons, 1986.
- 3. Gawler I. Timeline errors undermine hypothesis; “famous patient” did have secondary osteogenic sarcoma and tuberculosis. Intern Med J 2012; 42: 472-474.
- 4. Jelinek GA, Gawler RH. Thirty-year follow-up at pneumonectomy of a 58-year-old survivor of disseminated osteosarcoma. Med J Aust 2008; 189: 663-665.
- 5. Gawler R. Lack of adherence to scientific principles of objectivity. Intern Med J 2012; 42: 475-476.
No relevant disclosures.