Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-kwt9d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T07:26:10.535Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Laetrile: Should the Dying Patient Decide?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2021

George J. Annas
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

On July 1,1980, at four major medical institutions across the United States, the National Cancer Institute began testing Laetrile on cancer patients on whom all other therapy has failed. The study calls for 200 patients to receive the drug, along with a natural food diet. Results should be known in two years, and should demonstrate once and for all whether or not Laetrile has any cancer inhibiting effects. The study was undertaken primarily because of the large amount of publicity proponents of Laetrile have generated over the past five years, rather than any independent evidence that Laetrile may be an effective anticancer agent. Its commencement, however, provides a useful opportunity to review the legal status of Laetrile, and to suggest a possible approach to the controversy it has caused.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Nursing Law & Ethics , Volume 1 , Issue 7 , September 1980, pp. 1 - 9
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics 1980

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1. Tuma v. Board of Nursing, 593 P.2d 711 (Idaho 1979).Google Scholar
2. Rutherford v. U.S., 339 F. Supp. 1208 (W.D. Okla. 1975).Google Scholar
3. Rutherfordv. U.S., 542F.2d 1137 (10th Cir. 1976).Google Scholar
4. Rutherford v. U.S., 424 F. Supp. 105 (W.D. Okla. 1977).Google Scholar
5. Rutherford v. U.S., 429 F. Supp. 506 (W.D. Okla. 1977).Google Scholar
6. 42 Fed. Reg. 39767-39806 (Aug. 5, 1977).Google Scholar
7. Solzhenitsyn, AI, The Cancer Ward (Dell Pub. Co., New York, 1967) at 428.Google Scholar
8. The United States Supreme Court noted that there are currently more than 300 experimental cancer drags available to critically ill cancer patients in authorized institutions, and that in 1977 more than 90,000 cancer patients participated in Veterans Administration and National Cancer Institute- sponsored research on these drags. U.S. v. Rutherford, 544 U.S. 442 (1979), note 17.Google Scholar
9. Rutherford v. U.S., 438 F. Supp. 1287 (W.D. Okla. 1977).Google Scholar
10. Rutherford v. U.S., 582 F.2d 1234 (10th Cir. 1977).Google Scholar
11. U.S. v. Rutherford, 544 U.S. 442 (1979).Google Scholar
12. Id.Google Scholar
13. Rutherford v. U.S., 616 F.2d 455 (10th Cir. 1980).Google Scholar
14. Medicare and Medicaid Programs: Prohibition Against Payment for Less than Effective Drugs, 45 Fed. Reg. 37858 (June 5, 1980).Google Scholar
15. Unless the parents can find a licensed physician willing to administer Laetrile to their cancer-stricken child, and unless the child is stable or improving on such a regimen, parents may not permit the use of Laetrile or other unproven remedies on their children. See, Horwitz E, Of Love and Laetrile: Medical Decision Making in a Child's Best Interests, American Journal of Law and Medicine 5(3):271 (1979).Google Scholar