<?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; hate mail</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.badscience.net/category/hate-mail/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>Jeremy Laurance gets angry about scrutiny for journalists&#8217; claims</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2010/06/jeremy-laurance-is-an-angry-man/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2010/06/jeremy-laurance-is-an-angry-man/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jun 2010 14:23:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hate mail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[independent]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=1682</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[You might be amused by this piece from the Independent&#8217;s health reporter Jeremy Laurance today. It&#8217;s about what a bad man I am for pointing out when science and health journalists get things wrong. Alongside the lengthy ad hominem &#8211; a matter of taste for you &#8211; there are a number of mistakes and, more [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2010/06/jeremy-laurance-is-an-angry-man/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>61</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Steve Connor is an angry man</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2009/07/steve-connor-is-getting-eggy/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2009/07/steve-connor-is-getting-eggy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 10:44:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hate mail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[independent]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/2009/07/steve-connor-is-getting-eggy/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We’re having a meeting in a pub tonight, it’s free to get in and open to all, we’ll talk about the problems with science journalism. Apparently science journalists won&#8217;t tolerate this. www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/steve-connor-lofty-medics-should-stick-to-their-day-job-1724485.html Steve Connor: Lofty medics should stick to their day job Science Notebook: Doctors claim media coverage is &#8220;lazy, venal and silly&#8221; Independent, Tuesday, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2009/07/steve-connor-is-getting-eggy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>78</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A startling lack of critical self-appraisal</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/07/a-lack-of-critical-self-appraisal/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2007/07/a-lack-of-critical-self-appraisal/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2007 16:20:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[craig sams]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hate mail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stifling criticism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=475</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[One for the small print maybe, but I think this is culturally quite interesting, because to me it tells a small part of the story on how you can maintain a belief system by avoiding appraisal of your ideas. As you will remember, Craig Sams, a confectionery millionaire, recently wrote an article which I suppose [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2007/07/a-lack-of-critical-self-appraisal/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>52</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. The [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2007/06/dr-george-carlo-responds-to-andrew-goldacre/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>34</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Craig Sams of Green and Blacks gets angry</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/04/this-ageing-breadhead-guy-is-totally-angry-with-me/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2007/04/this-ageing-breadhead-guy-is-totally-angry-with-me/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Apr 2007 08:53:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[alternative medicine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chocolate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[craig sams]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gillian mckeith]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hate mail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nutritionists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[onanism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=398</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Craig Sams is the founder of Green and Blacks. He made his money from chocolates, ice cream, and biscuits, and he is very angry with me for questioning the science behind Dr Gillian McKeith PhD and their corporate world. This gem is from Natural Products magazine, the in-house trade publication of the nutritionism industry. I&#8217;ve [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2007/04/this-ageing-breadhead-guy-is-totally-angry-with-me/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>106</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Lionel Milgrom &#8211; Quality Homeopathic Debate</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2006/12/the-quality-of-homeopathic-debate/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2006/12/the-quality-of-homeopathic-debate/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 Dec 2006 15:32:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hate mail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[homeopathy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=341</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Bit of a ramble, so feel free to bypass this post, but this is quite odd to me. When a chap receives a communique from one of the Directors of the Society of Homeopaths, that august representative body, it only seems fair to give it some thought and some space. This charming email from Lionel [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2006/12/the-quality-of-homeopathic-debate/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>130</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Never as bad as it looks</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2005/09/never-as-bad-as-it-looks/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2005/09/never-as-bad-as-it-looks/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Sep 2005 03:02:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hate mail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[letters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scare stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[statistics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[times]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[water]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=171</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ben Goldacre Thursday September 1, 2005 The Guardian Â· &#8220;One of Britain&#8217;s most widely prescribed antidepressants has been linked to a seven-fold increase in suicide attempts.&#8221; Hold the front page! Oh hang on, it&#8217;s on the front page of the Times already. &#8220;An analysis of trials for Seroxat involving more than 1,500 patients found seven [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2005/09/never-as-bad-as-it-looks/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>15</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Not by a long chalk</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2005/02/not-by-a-long-chalk/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2005/02/not-by-a-long-chalk/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Feb 2005 14:56:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[adverts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hate mail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[very basic science]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=114</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ben Goldacre Thursday February 3, 2005 The Guardian Â· Sometimes people ask: what are your qualifications, to decide what is and isn&#8217;t bad science? The answer is that it doesn&#8217;t take much. Take the new television advert for cleaning product Cillit Bang: &#8220;Limescale is simply calcium that sticks, and if solid calcium dissolves this fast [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2005/02/not-by-a-long-chalk/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Anyone up for a challenge?</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2003/10/anyone-up-for-a-challenge/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2003/10/anyone-up-for-a-challenge/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2003 04:22:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hate mail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[homeopathy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=91</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Anyone up for a challenge? Thursday October 9, 2003 The Guardian Talk bad science Â· I&#8217;ve been invited to put my money where my sarcastic little mouth is. Soroush Ebrahimi, &#8220;a professional and licensed homeopath&#8221;, is angered by my dismissive attitude towards expensive therapies not backed up by systematic reviews of the research data. He [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2003/10/anyone-up-for-a-challenge/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

