<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Bad Science &#187; drurrrgs</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.badscience.net/category/drurgs/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.badscience.net</link>
	<description>Ben Goldacre&#039;s Bad Science column from the Guardian and more...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2012 15:39:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Politicians can divine which policy works best by using their special magic politician beam</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2010/05/politicians-can-divine-which-policy-works-best-by-using-their-special-magic-politician-beam/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2010/05/politicians-can-divine-which-policy-works-best-by-using-their-special-magic-politician-beam/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 May 2010 23:45:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drurrrgs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[politics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/2010/05/politicians-can-divine-which-policy-works-best-by-using-their-special-magic-politician-beam/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ben Goldacre, The Guardian, Saturday 22 May 2010 So all good citizens this week are poring over the “Programme For Government”, and it’s true to say that there is much to be pleased with. Labour wasn’t all about unbridled credit and fun public sector spending sprees: they kept all your emails, kept records of the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2010/05/politicians-can-divine-which-policy-works-best-by-using-their-special-magic-politician-beam/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>36</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Nutt Sack Affair (part 493)</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2009/11/the-nutt-sack-affair-part-493/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2009/11/the-nutt-sack-affair-part-493/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Nov 2009 00:06:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drurrrgs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[evidence based policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[politics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/2009/11/the-nutt-sack-affair-part-493/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ben Goldacre, Saturday 7 November 2009, The Guardian Obviously it’s pleasing to see, in the storm of commentary over Professor Nutt’s sacking, that everyone outside of politics now recognises the importance of scientific evidence in devising laws. But a strange reasoning twitch has appeared, in the arguments of politicians and right wing commentators. Science can [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2009/11/the-nutt-sack-affair-part-493/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>74</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>This is my column. This is my column on drugs. Any questions?</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2009/06/this-is-my-column-this-is-my-column-on-drugs-any-questions/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2009/06/this-is-my-column-this-is-my-column-on-drugs-any-questions/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Jun 2009 23:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drurrrgs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[evidence based policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social policy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/2009/06/this-is-my-column-this-is-my-column-on-drugs-any-questions/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ben Goldacre Saturday 13 June 2009 The Guardian In areas of moral and political conflict people will always behave badly with evidence, so the war on drugs is a consistent source of entertainment. We have already seen how cannabis being “25 times stronger” was a fantasy, how drugs-related deaths were quietly dropped from the outcome [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2009/06/this-is-my-column-this-is-my-column-on-drugs-any-questions/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>66</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A rock of crack as big as the Ritz</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2009/02/a-rock-of-crack-as-big-as-the-ritz/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2009/02/a-rock-of-crack-as-big-as-the-ritz/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Feb 2009 02:04:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drurrrgs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[statistics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[telegraph]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/2009/02/a-rock-of-crack-as-big-as-the-ritz/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ben Goldacre Saturday February 21 2009 The Guardian In a week where our dear Daily Mail ran with the headline &#8220;How using Facebook could raise your risk of cancer&#8221;, I will exercise some self control, and write about drugs instead. &#8220;Seven hundred British troops seized four Taliban narcotics factories containing £50m of drugs&#8221; said the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2009/02/a-rock-of-crack-as-big-as-the-ritz/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>65</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The least surrogate outcome</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2008/04/the-least-surrogate-outcome/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2008/04/the-least-surrogate-outcome/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Apr 2008 00:15:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drurrrgs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[evidence based policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[statistics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=653</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ben Goldacre The Guardian, Saturday April 5 2008 There&#8217;s this vague idea &#8211; which has been going around for the past few centuries &#8211; that statistics is quite difficult. But in reality the maths is often the least of your problems: the tricky bit comes way before the number crunching, when you are deciding what [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2008/04/the-least-surrogate-outcome/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>15</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Trivial Disputes</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2008/02/trivial-disputes-2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2008/02/trivial-disputes-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Feb 2008 04:14:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[badscience]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bbc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[climate change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drurrrgs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[independent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[telegraph]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=610</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There are no difficult ideas in this column. Like, for example, when I tell you about the Daily Telegraph front page headline which says &#8220;Abuse of cannabis puts 500 a week in hospital&#8221;, and it turns out they&#8217;re actually quoting a figure from a report on the number of people having contact with any drug [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2008/02/trivial-disputes-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>48</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Blah blah cannabis blah blah blah</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/07/blah-blah-cannabis-blah-blah-blah/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2007/07/blah-blah-cannabis-blah-blah-blah/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Jul 2007 01:24:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[drurrrgs]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=476</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Guardian Saturday July 28 2007 You know when cannabis hits the news you&#8217;re in for a bit of fun, and this week&#8217;s story about cannabis causing psychosis was no exception. The paper was a systematic review and then a &#8220;meta-analysis&#8221; of the data which has already been collected, looking at whether people who smoke [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2007/07/blah-blah-cannabis-blah-blah-blah/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>67</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Reefer Badness</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/03/reefer-badness/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2007/03/reefer-badness/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Mar 2007 01:09:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drurrrgs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[references]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[statistics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=389</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ben Goldacre Saturday March 24, 2007 The Guardian The more I see of the world [looks pensively out of window] the more it strikes me that people seem to want more science, rather than less, and to deploy it in odd ways: to abrogate responsibility; to validate a hunch; to render a political or cultural [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2007/03/reefer-badness/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>51</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Laugh? I nearly died.</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/03/laugh-i-nearly-died/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2007/03/laugh-i-nearly-died/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Mar 2007 00:18:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drurrrgs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scare stories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=382</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ben Goldacre Saturday March 10, 2007 The Guardian Obviously nobody is more worried than I about the hippie crack epidemic: nitrous oxide â€“ better known as laughing gas &#8211; has hit the news, after the death of a man with a plastic bag over his head, and a cannister of the drug connected to himself. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2007/03/laugh-i-nearly-died/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>62</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Heroin On Prescription</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2006/11/methadone-and-heroin/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2006/11/methadone-and-heroin/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Nov 2006 00:06:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drurrrgs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[onanism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=327</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Suddenly heroin prescription is back in the news, so here&#8217;s an archaeological find from the hard-drive: an essay I wrote in praise of heroin prescription, for the &#8220;Roger Hole Essay Prize in Medical Scepticism&#8221;, as a young undergraduate in medicine, in 1998. The prize was judged by Lewis Wolpert, and winning it netted me the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2006/11/methadone-and-heroin/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>32</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Prohibition Vs the Gold Standard</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2006/08/prohibition-vs-the-gold-standard/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2006/08/prohibition-vs-the-gold-standard/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Aug 2006 01:01:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dangers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drurrrgs]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=273</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ben Goldacre Saturday August 5, 2006 The Guardian Certain areas of human conduct lend themselves so readily to bad science that you have to wonder if there is a pattern emerging. Last week the parliamentary science and technology committee looked into the ABC classification of illegal drugs, and found it was rubbish. This is not [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2006/08/prohibition-vs-the-gold-standard/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>68</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;Cocaine Floods The Playground&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2006/03/cocaine-floods-the-playground/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2006/03/cocaine-floods-the-playground/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Mar 2006 23:45:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drurrrgs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mirror]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scare stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[statistics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[telegraph]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[times]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=230</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ben Goldacre Saturday April 1, 2006 The Guardian Nothing comes for free: if you can cope with 400 words on statistics, we can trash a front page news story together. &#8220;Cocaine floods the playground,&#8221; roared the front page of the Times last Friday. &#8220;Use of the addictive drug by children doubles in a year.&#8221; Doubles? [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2006/03/cocaine-floods-the-playground/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>123</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

