Is this you? As a journalist, you can create a free Muck Rack account to customize your profile, list your contact preferences, and upload a portfolio of your best work.
Claim your profile
In March of last year, CMAJ’s editors and many of its stakeholders feared for the journal’s future. The editor-in-chief had been fired, the Journal Oversight Committee disbanded and a task force struck by the Canadian Medical Association (CMA) and Joule (the subsidiary that owns CMAJ) to re-examine CMAJ’s mission.1 Some commenters questioned the 105-year-old journal’s editorial independence and even its viability. What has happened instead is remarkable.
Canada’s public and private sectors are not doing enough to prevent food-borne illnesses.1 Among the major failings are inadequate active surveillance systems, an inability to trace foods from “farm to fork” and a lack of incentives to keep food safe along the “farm to fork” pathway. The result?
Many consumers believe that natural health products are effective therapies and are safer than prescription drugs. This is oddly illogical reasoning. Although both appear to carry a similar Health Canada stamp of approval, there remains a specious dichotomy in the criteria and evidence needed for approval and monitoring of a drug compared with a natural health product.
As a journalist, you can create a free Muck Rack account to customize your profile, list your contact preferences, and upload a portfolio of your best work.
