<?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/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
>

<channel>
	<title>Bad Science &#187; electrosensitivity</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.badscience.net/category/electrosensitivity/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>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 16:21:56 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<!-- podcast_generator="podPress/8.8" -->
		<copyright>&#xA9;Ben Goldacre </copyright>
		<managingEditor>ben@badscience.net (Ben Goldacre)</managingEditor>
		<webMaster>ben@badscience.net(Ben Goldacre)</webMaster>
		<category></category>
		<ttl>1440</ttl>
		<itunes:keywords></itunes:keywords>
		<itunes:subtitle></itunes:subtitle>
		<itunes:summary>Ben Goldacre\\\'s Bad Science column from the Guardian and more...</itunes:summary>
		<itunes:author>Ben Goldacre</itunes:author>
		<itunes:category text="Science &amp; Medicine"/>
<itunes:category text="Society &amp; Culture"/>
		<itunes:owner>
			<itunes:name>Ben Goldacre</itunes:name>
			<itunes:email>ben@badscience.net</itunes:email>
		</itunes:owner>
		<itunes:block>No</itunes:block>
		<itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
		<itunes:image href="http://www.badscience.net/wp-content/rubberduck2thumb2.JPG" />
		
		<item>
		<title>The plausibility effect</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2008/07/testing-the-plausibility-effect/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2008/07/testing-the-plausibility-effect/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jul 2008 23:32:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[electrosensitivity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[psychology of woo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[roger coghill]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[secret data]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/2008/07/testing-the-plausibility-effect/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ben Goldacre
The Guardian,
Saturday July 12, 2008
You will remember, two weeks ago now, we saw the Sunday Express claiming on its front page that an impressive government adviser called Dr Roger Coghill had performed a research study demonstrating that the Bridgend suicide cases all lived closer to a mobile phone mast than average. When I contacted [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2008/07/testing-the-plausibility-effect/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>36</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Roger Coghill and the Aids test</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2008/06/roger-coghill-fails-the-aids-test/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2008/06/roger-coghill-fails-the-aids-test/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Jun 2008 01:17:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[PhDs, doctors, and qualifications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[competing interests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[electrosensitivity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[express]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[herbal remedies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[magnets]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[roger coghill]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[statistics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/2008/06/roger-coghill-fails-the-aids-test/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ben Goldacre
The Guardian,
Saturday June 28, 2008
It&#8217;s the big stories I enjoy the most. &#8220;Suicides linked to phone masts&#8221; roared the Sunday Express front-page headline this week. &#8220;The spate of deaths among young people in Britain&#8217;s suicide capital could be linked to radio waves from dozens of mobile phone transmitter masts near the victims&#8217; homes.&#8221;

Who is [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2008/06/roger-coghill-fails-the-aids-test/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>92</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>BBC Editorial Complaints Unit debags the Panorama WiFi scare</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/11/bbc-editorial-complaints-unit-debags-the-panorama-wifi-scare/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2007/11/bbc-editorial-complaints-unit-debags-the-panorama-wifi-scare/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2007 23:03:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bbc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[electrosensitivity]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/2007/11/bbc-editorial-complaints-unit-debags-the-panorama-wifi-scare/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[You will remember Panorama&#8217;s WiFi program very clearly. Even the children in the school where they tried to film it spotted the problems with their methodology, and they were promptly booted out by a science teacher. I for one found those two little details truly mood enhancing, and you can read the full story here [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2007/11/bbc-editorial-complaints-unit-debags-the-panorama-wifi-scare/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>16</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Buy your Powerwatch goodies today!</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/10/buy-your-powerwatch-goodies-today/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2007/10/buy-your-powerwatch-goodies-today/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Oct 2007 12:44:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[electrosensitivity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[powerwatch - alasdair philips]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=547</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ I thought I&#8217;d briefly share this email which just arrived. As you can see the Powerwatch/EMFields product range is expanding, and as they say, electromagnetic hypersensitivity has been officially recognised as a disability by the government. If you&#8217;re frightened about electromagnetic radiation you can pay £28 to subscribe to the Powerwatch website. You can [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2007/10/buy-your-powerwatch-goodies-today/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>19</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Essex electrosensitivity study results&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/07/essex-electrosensitivity-study-results/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2007/07/essex-electrosensitivity-study-results/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jul 2007 11:25:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[electrosensitivity]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=470</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8230; and they&#8217;re negative. Subjects were unable to distinguish whether the signal was present or absent. It is truly fantastic that for almost the first time ever the discussion around electrosensitivity is actually addressing the evidence, rather than anecdote.  Cue a barrage of abuse from the electrosensitive lobby. 
I&#8217;ll be updating as responses from [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2007/07/essex-electrosensitivity-study-results/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>241</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Updated with lobby feedback &#8211; A thought experiment for the electrosensitivity lobby</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/07/a-thought-experiment-for-the-electrosensitivity-lobby/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2007/07/a-thought-experiment-for-the-electrosensitivity-lobby/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:36:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[electrosensitivity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[powerwatch - alasdair philips]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=466</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The electrosensitivity lobby are famously selective about the evidence they quote. They simply ignore the large body of data finding that electrosensitivity symptoms are not worsened by e-m waves, and they selectively quote only data which supports their hypothesis, in a pattern which can be seen throughout the internet.
I fear this may mislead their readers, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2007/07/a-thought-experiment-for-the-electrosensitivity-lobby/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>42</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Cherry Picking and the Professional Association of Teachers</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/06/cherry-picking-and-the-professional-association-of-teachers/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2007/06/cherry-picking-and-the-professional-association-of-teachers/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Jun 2007 12:54:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[electrosensitivity]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=438</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It&#8217;s a small thing, but if Wi-Fi and reality editing interest you, then here is a quick letter I just pinged off. Before you accuse me of being a little too interested, I can write veeeery quickly, and this kind of phenomenon really does fascinate me.
Dear Professional Association of Teachers,
I have just received a small [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2007/06/cherry-picking-and-the-professional-association-of-teachers/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>77</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>BMJ Column &#8211; Why don&#8217;t journalists mention the data?</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/06/bmj-column-why-dont-journalists-mention-the-data/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2007/06/bmj-column-why-dont-journalists-mention-the-data/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Jun 2007 18:53:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[electrosensitivity]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=436</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[BMJ  2007;334:1249 (16 June)
doi:10.1136/bmj.39245.510718.59
Observations
Media watch
Why don&#8217;t journalists mention the data?

Have stories about &#8220;electrosensitivity&#8221; simply been lifted from those promoting this new diagnosis?
Sometimes, as a doctor who also writes in the newspapers, a dark thought comes across me: wouldn&#8217;t it be so refreshing -secretly, wouldn&#8217;t it feel so free &#8211; to leave the medical thing [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2007/06/bmj-column-why-dont-journalists-mention-the-data/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>37</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Dr George Carlo responds to Andrew Goldacre</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/06/dr-george-carlo-responds-to-andrew-goldacre/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2007/06/dr-george-carlo-responds-to-andrew-goldacre/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Jun 2007 20:46:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[electrosensitivity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hate mail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[letters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[references]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stifling criticism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=430</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This post is only if you&#8217;re not bored of the rather trying electrosensitivity lobby. Here is a letter which has popped up all over the interweb, I assume it is genuinely from Dr Carlo, who is hawked about as a rather eminent figure, and not a fake created in an effort to smear him.

  [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2007/06/dr-george-carlo-responds-to-andrew-goldacre/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>52</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>And science said atom bombs were safe too&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/06/and-science-said-atom-bombs-were-safe-too/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2007/06/and-science-said-atom-bombs-were-safe-too/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Jun 2007 15:51:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bbc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[electrosensitivity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[independent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[powerwatch - alasdair philips]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=428</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;m in a dash, but I thought you deserved these two brave rebuttals of the peripheral criticisms that the ubiquitous electromagnetic radiation scaremongers have received.
Jasper Carrott of all people on BBC2 (funny how despite being such a massive source of electromagnetic radiation they still have such a thing about beating people up over the subject)
&#8230;
 [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2007/06/and-science-said-atom-bombs-were-safe-too/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>78</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Electrosensitives: the new cash cow of the woo industry</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/06/electrosensitives-the-new-cash-cow-of-the-woo-industry/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2007/06/electrosensitives-the-new-cash-cow-of-the-woo-industry/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Jun 2007 00:07:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[electrosensitivity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[independent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patrick holford]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[powerwatch - alasdair philips]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scare stories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=425</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ben Goldacre
Saturday June 2, 2007
The Guardian
The Independent has put its green columnist Julia Stephenson on to Panorama&#8217;s Wi-Fi scare story: a charming green party candidate and beef heiress living in Chelsea on a trust fund, who believes her symptoms of tiredness and headache are caused by electromagnetic radiation from phones and Wi-Fi.

The most important background [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2007/06/electrosensitives-the-new-cash-cow-of-the-woo-industry/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>152</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Electrosmog. The Independent has seriously excelled itself this time</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/05/electrosmog-the-independent-has-seriously-excelled-itself-this-time-2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2007/05/electrosmog-the-independent-has-seriously-excelled-itself-this-time-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 May 2007 14:36:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[electrosensitivity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[independent]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=422</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This is genuinely fascinating: from the article in today&#8217;s Independent, electrosensitivity now seems to be growing into an explicitly alternative diagnosis, to go with alternative therapies. For this article your Bad Science Bingo high scorers are: q-link, homeopathy, misrepresenting Sweden, and ignoring the provocation studies. 
environment.independent.co.uk/lifestyle/article2600308.ece
My war on electrosmog: Julia Stephenson sets out to clear [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2007/05/electrosmog-the-independent-has-seriously-excelled-itself-this-time-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>101</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Wi-Fi Wants To Kill Your Children&#8230; But Alasdair Philips of Powerwatch sells the cure!</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/05/so-simple-a-child-could-spot-it/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2007/05/so-simple-a-child-could-spot-it/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 May 2007 23:03:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bbc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[electrosensitivity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[powerwatch - alasdair philips]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scare stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[very basic science]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=418</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hello visitors from boingboing/slashdot. I&#8217;m a doctor and I write in the Guardian and the BMJ about quackery, health scares, and pseudoscience in the media.
Ben Goldacre
Saturday May 26, 2007
The Guardian
Won&#8217;t somebody, please, think of the children? Three weeks ago I received my favourite email of all time, from a science teacher. &#8220;I&#8217;ve just had to [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2007/05/so-simple-a-child-could-spot-it/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>203</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Paul Kenyon from BBC Panorama Responds on Wi-Fi Scare</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/05/paul-kenyon-from-panorama-responds-on-wi-fi-scare/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2007/05/paul-kenyon-from-panorama-responds-on-wi-fi-scare/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 May 2007 19:52:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bbc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[electrosensitivity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[powerwatch - alasdair philips]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scare stories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=417</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;ve just been sent this by the BBC publicity office, it is a response from Paul Kenyon, the presenter of the show, and very nice chap too. 
He is talking about the posts here and here. 
And remember &#8211; by the miracle of the interweb &#8211; this is the show he is talking about.
 

Hi [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2007/05/paul-kenyon-from-panorama-responds-on-wi-fi-scare/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>40</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Amusing Leaked Letter &#8211; BBC Panorama Wi-Fi &#8211; now updated with further response from BBC</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/05/leaked-letter-bbc-panorama-wi-fi/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2007/05/leaked-letter-bbc-panorama-wi-fi/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 May 2007 16:09:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bbc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[electrosensitivity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[powerwatch - alasdair philips]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=415</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This has fallen into my hands. It is &#8211; I am informed &#8211; the letter that the BBC complaints people are planning to send to people if they complain about the ludicrous Panorama Wi-Fi show from Monday, featuring Alasdair Philips and electromagnetic hypersensitivity. 
I thought it might amuse you to know that it has apparently [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2007/05/leaked-letter-bbc-panorama-wi-fi/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>55</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>BBC Panorama on WiFi &#8211; Updated with response from Panorama presenter Paul Kenyon</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/05/bbc-panorama-on-wifi/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2007/05/bbc-panorama-on-wifi/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 May 2007 23:21:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[electrosensitivity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[powerwatch - alasdair philips]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=414</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[You have to skip through 2 minutes of Eastenders to get to it&#8230;
 
.
&#8220;Discuss&#8221;.

I haven&#8217;t got time right now to go forensic on its ass right now, but there is a lot to be concerned about in this show. For example, the discussion on &#8220;electrohypersensitivity&#8221; rather neglected this kind of material:
www.badscience.net/?p=239
And it was striking that [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2007/05/bbc-panorama-on-wifi/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>67</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Amazing Qlink Science Pedant</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/05/the-amazing-qlink-science-pedant/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2007/05/the-amazing-qlink-science-pedant/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 May 2007 02:05:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[ITV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[adverts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[alternative medicine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[electrosensitivity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patrick holford]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[qlink]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[times]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=413</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ben Goldacre
Saturday May 19, 2007
The Guardian
Normally I&#8217;d ignore quack medical devices, but when the catalogue from Health Products For Life &#8211; run by vitamin pill salesman Patrick Holford  &#8211; arrived, I found an unexpected treat waiting for me. Among his usual &#8220;special formulation&#8221; pill-peddling banter, there was the QLink pendant, at just Â£69.99.

The QLink [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2007/05/the-amazing-qlink-science-pedant/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>75</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>I have nothing to declare but my cheekiness</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2006/05/i-have-nothing-to-declare-but-my-cheekiness/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2006/05/i-have-nothing-to-declare-but-my-cheekiness/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 May 2006 01:09:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dangers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[electrosensitivity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[medicalisation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patrick holford]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[powerwatch - alasdair philips]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scare stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[very basic science]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=241</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ben Goldacre
Saturday May 20, 2006
The Guardian
I am routinely accused, in long and angry letters, of being in the pay of the pharmaceutical industry, the mobile phone industry, and the government. Needless to say I lap it up, and would never engage in similarly ad hominem attacks in return, since critiques of character and finance are [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2006/05/i-have-nothing-to-declare-but-my-cheekiness/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>135</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Factors that risk being left out of the equation</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2006/05/attack-of-the-killer-kettles/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2006/05/attack-of-the-killer-kettles/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 May 2006 21:19:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[electrosensitivity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[medicalisation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scare stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[statistics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[times]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=239</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ben Goldacre
Saturday May 13, 2006
The Guardian
&#8220;Electromagnetic fields stemming from gadgets such as kettles, computers and microwaves, contribute towards a cloud of unseen emissions &#8211; even when they are switched off.&#8221; It&#8217;s a sinister idea, and &#8220;Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity&#8221; is sweeping the nation, or at least the Independent and the Daily Mail last week. Symptoms include fatigue, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2006/05/attack-of-the-killer-kettles/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>174</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>And now the news</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2006/05/and-now-the-news/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2006/05/and-now-the-news/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 May 2006 16:44:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[MMR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[electrosensitivity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scare stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[times]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=237</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ben Goldacre
Saturday May 6, 2006
The Guardian
And now here&#8217;s the news they didn&#8217;t tell you. You might remember the scare stories about mercury fillings from the past two decades: they come around every few years, usually accompanied by a personal anecdote, where fatigue, dizziness and headaches are all vanquished with the removal of the fillings by [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2006/05/and-now-the-news/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>55</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
