<?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; telegraph</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.badscience.net/category/media/papers-telegraph/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>Health Warning: Exercise Makes You Fat</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2009/08/health-warning-exercise-makes-you-fat/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2009/08/health-warning-exercise-makes-you-fat/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 23:06:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[evidence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[numerical context]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[telegraph]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=1334</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ben Goldacre, 29 August 2009, The Guardian Why would you listen to a government health message, or your GP practise nurse, when the Sunday Telegraph has much more exciting news? “Health warning: exercise makes you fat” is the kind of full-width headline you want to see across a broadsheet page: it’s affirmative, it’s reassuring, and [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2009/08/health-warning-exercise-makes-you-fat/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>80</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Rape: a helpful non-correction from the Telegraph</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2009/07/rape-a-non-correction-from-the-telegraph/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2009/07/rape-a-non-correction-from-the-telegraph/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 13:05:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[evidence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[telegraph]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/2009/07/rape-a-non-correction-from-the-telegraph/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Update: Just got an email from Sophia Shaw, the MSc student in question: &#8220;I am happy that they have made an apology , but I am very aware that a number of other mistakes were made that were not acknowledge in their statement. Sophia&#8221; The media is a game-like world of blurry truths, where the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2009/07/rape-a-non-correction-from-the-telegraph/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>34</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Asking for it</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2009/07/asking-for-it/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2009/07/asking-for-it/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Jul 2009 11:57:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[evidence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rape]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[telegraph]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/2009/07/asking-for-it/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ben Goldacre, The Guardian, Saturday 4 July 2009 There’s nothing like science for giving that objective, white-coat flavoured legitimacy to your prejudices, so it must have been a great day for Telegraph readers when they came across the headline “Women who dress provocatively more likely to be raped, claim scientists”. Ah, scientists. “Women who drink [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2009/07/asking-for-it/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>52</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Jonathan Leake misreports scientist&#8217;s claims</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2009/06/behind-the-curtains/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2009/06/behind-the-curtains/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Jun 2009 23:10:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jonathan leake]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[telegraph]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/2009/06/behind-the-curtains/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ben Goldacre The Guardian Saturday 20 June 2009 When is a conversation public, an act of performance, and when is it private? This problem rears its head with greater frequency in the age of the internet, as more discussions are publicly accessible without necessarily, in the minds of the participants, being for the public. In [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2009/06/behind-the-curtains/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>11</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Experts say new scientific evidence helpfully justifies massive pre-existing moral prejudice.</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2009/04/experts-say-new-scientific-evidence-helpfully-justifies-massive-pre-existing-moral-prejudice/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2009/04/experts-say-new-scientific-evidence-helpfully-justifies-massive-pre-existing-moral-prejudice/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Apr 2009 04:45:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[dodgy academic press releases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[medicalisation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MMR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scare stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[telegraph]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/2009/04/experts-say-new-scientific-evidence-helpfully-justifies-massive-pre-existing-moral-prejudice/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ben Goldacre Saturday April 18, 2009 The Guardian Is it somehow possible – and I know I’m going out on a limb here – that journalists wilfully misinterpret and ignore scientific evidence, simply in order to generate stories that reflect their own political and cultural prejudices? Because my friend Martin, from the excellent layscience blog, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2009/04/experts-say-new-scientific-evidence-helpfully-justifies-massive-pre-existing-moral-prejudice/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>72</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 Daily Telegraph misrepresent a scientist&#8217;s work, then refuse to correct it when he writes to them.</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2009/01/the-telegraph-misrepresent-a-scientists-work-on-climate-and-then-refuse-to-correct-it-when-he-writes-to-them/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2009/01/the-telegraph-misrepresent-a-scientists-work-on-climate-and-then-refuse-to-correct-it-when-he-writes-to-them/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2009 00:01:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[climate change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[telegraph]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/2009/01/the-telegraph-misrepresent-a-scientists-work-on-climate-and-then-refuse-to-correct-it-when-he-writes-to-them/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[People in the &#8220;public engagement&#8221; community often talk about how scientists should do more to communicate with the media. I take a different line: scientists have good grounds to be extremely nervous, and some entities and journalists could quite fairly be blacklisted. Here&#8217;s just one more example. It doesn&#8217;t stand out, I get sent plenty [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2009/01/the-telegraph-misrepresent-a-scientists-work-on-climate-and-then-refuse-to-correct-it-when-he-writes-to-them/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>119</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>It&#8217;s not my fault I fall into repetitive self parody. You started it.</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2008/12/its-not-my-fault-i-fall-into-repetitive-self-parody-you-started-it/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2008/12/its-not-my-fault-i-fall-into-repetitive-self-parody-you-started-it/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Dec 2008 23:30:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[express]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[independent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mirror]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MMR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[telegraph]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/2008/12/its-not-my-fault-i-fall-into-repetitive-self-parody-you-started-it/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ben Goldacre The Guardian Saturday December 6 2008 Writing this column only really scares me because I wonder whether everything else in the media is as shamelessly, venally, manipulatively, one-sidedly, selectively reported on as the things I know about. I&#8217;m not going to go on about MMR again. But this week the reality editing was [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2008/12/its-not-my-fault-i-fall-into-repetitive-self-parody-you-started-it/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>181</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Generous review of my book in the Daily Telegraph</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2008/10/generous-review-of-my-book-in-the-daily-telegraph/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2008/10/generous-review-of-my-book-in-the-daily-telegraph/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Oct 2008 22:19:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[book]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[book reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[onanism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[telegraph]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/2008/10/generous-review-of-my-book-in-the-daily-telegraph/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There&#8217;s a very nice review of my book &#8220;Bad Science&#8221; in the Telegraph this week. I have to say I&#8217;m delighted to see that the two newspapers I&#8217;ve probably been meanest about over recent years are the two that have reviewed it so far. This betrays a genuinely wholesome grown up approach to life which [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2008/10/generous-review-of-my-book-in-the-daily-telegraph/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>11</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Don&#8217;t let the facts spoil a good story</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2008/09/dont-let-the-facts-spoil-a-good-story/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2008/09/dont-let-the-facts-spoil-a-good-story/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Sep 2008 16:07:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[sun]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[telegraph]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/2008/09/dont-let-the-facts-spoil-a-good-story/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Oops sorry, in all the excitement about Matthias Rath I forgot to post last week&#8217;s column, here it is. Ben Goldacre The Guardian, Saturday September 13 2008 Here is a cautionary tale for anyone working in research. &#8220;Captain Cook and Lord Nelson seem unlikely figureheads in the fight against climate change alarmists,&#8221; said the Sun. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2008/09/dont-let-the-facts-spoil-a-good-story/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Blame everyone but yourselves</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2008/07/blame-everyone-but-yourselves/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2008/07/blame-everyone-but-yourselves/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 22:24:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[alternative medicine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BANT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dangers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[detox]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nutritionists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulating nonsense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[telegraph]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/2008/07/blame-everyone-but-yourselves/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ben Goldacre The Guardian, Saturday July 26 2008 Like many professions who kill people with some regularity, doctors have elaborate systems for seeing what went wrong afterwards, and the answer is rarely “Brian did it”. This week the papers have been alive with criticism for quack nutritionism after the case of Dawn Page, a 52 [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2008/07/blame-everyone-but-yourselves/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>69</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>You are hereby sentenced eternally to wander the newspapers, fruitlessly mocking nutriwoo</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2008/07/you-are-hereby-sentenced-eternally-to-wander-the-newspapers-fruitlessly-mocking-nutriwoo/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2008/07/you-are-hereby-sentenced-eternally-to-wander-the-newspapers-fruitlessly-mocking-nutriwoo/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Jul 2008 10:19:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[badscience]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nutritionists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[telegraph]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/2008/07/you-are-hereby-sentenced-eternally-to-wander-the-newspapers-fruitlessly-mocking-nutriwoo/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ben Goldacre The Guardian, Saturday July 26 2008 The newspapers are so profoundly overrun with pseudoscience about food that there&#8217;s no point in documenting it any longer. They will continue with their Sisyphean task of dividing all the inanimate objects in the world into the ones that either cause or cure cancer, and I will [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2008/07/you-are-hereby-sentenced-eternally-to-wander-the-newspapers-fruitlessly-mocking-nutriwoo/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>48</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The amazing disappearing reappearing finger</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2008/05/pixie-dust-my-arse/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2008/05/pixie-dust-my-arse/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 May 2008 00:12:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bbc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ITV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[miracles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sun]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[telegraph]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[times]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=669</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ben Goldacre The Guardian, Saturday May 3 2008 Traditionally on May Day the fool plays at pratfalls and buffoonery around local morris dancers, brandishing his fool&#8217;s bauble, an inflated pig&#8217;s bladder on a stick, with which he bewitches and controls the crowds. To the uninitiated it looks like chaos, but for his own safety the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2008/05/pixie-dust-my-arse/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>23</slash:comments>
<enclosure url="http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/listenagain/ram/today3_finger_20080502.ram" length="0" type="audio/x-pn-realaudio" />
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;Pixie Dust helps man grow new finger&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2008/05/finger-bullshit/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2008/05/finger-bullshit/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 May 2008 13:32:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bbc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sun]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[telegraph]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[times]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=664</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Very briefly &#8211; because this kind of thing irritates me so much that I can&#8217;t be bothered to devote a great deal of time to it &#8211; in almost every single newspaper and media outlet today you will read about the Pixie Dust which helped a man&#8217;s finger grow back: &#8220;The man who grew a [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2008/05/finger-bullshit/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>44</slash:comments>
<enclosure url="http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/listenagain/ram/today3_20080502.ram" length="0" type="audio/x-pn-realaudio" />
		</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>The Huff</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2008/01/the-huff/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2008/01/the-huff/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Jan 2008 00:05:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[statistics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[telegraph]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=605</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ben Goldacre The Guardian, Saturday January 19 2008 In 1954 a man called Darrell Huff published a book called &#8220;How to lie with statistics&#8220;. Chapter one is called &#8220;the sample with built in bias&#8221; and it reads exactly like this column, which I&#8217;m about to write, on a Daily Telegraph story in 2008. Huff sets [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2008/01/the-huff/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>44</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Even&#8230; more&#8230; ludicrous teleology from evolutionary psychologists</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/11/even-more-ludicrous-teleology-from-evolutionary-psychologists/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2007/11/even-more-ludicrous-teleology-from-evolutionary-psychologists/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Nov 2007 13:58:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[evolutionary psychology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[telegraph]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[times]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/2007/11/even-more-ludicrous-teleology-from-evolutionary-psychologists/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If academic funding was determined by newspaper coverage we would never research anything but MMR and evolutionary psychology. Which is fine. But if you&#8217;re going to tell teleological &#8220;just-so&#8221; stories about human behaviour, then you could at least make an effort, and try to maintain a degree of internal consistency. Today yet another puddle of [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2007/11/even-more-ludicrous-teleology-from-evolutionary-psychologists/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>41</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Quantitative Analysis Of The Frequency With Which One Company Is Promoted, And  By Whom, In UK National Newspapers UPDATED 30/9/06</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2006/09/a-quantitative-analysis-of-the-frequency-with-which-one-company-is-promoted-and-by-whom-in-uk-national-newspapers/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2006/09/a-quantitative-analysis-of-the-frequency-with-which-one-company-is-promoted-and-by-whom-in-uk-national-newspapers/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Sep 2006 18:58:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[adverts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[alternative medicine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[express]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[statistics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[telegraph]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[times]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=253</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;A Quantitative Analysis Of The Frequency With Which One Company Is Promoted, And By Whom, In UK National Newspapers&#8221; Updated 16th September 2006. Dr Ben Goldacre (Corresponding Author) Bad Science Research Institute, www.badscience.net ben@badscience.net Introduction. Susan Clark is an alternative therapy columnist who recently made a cheeky attack on her critics. It was subsequently noted [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2006/09/a-quantitative-analysis-of-the-frequency-with-which-one-company-is-promoted-and-by-whom-in-uk-national-newspapers/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>48</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>MMR Is Back</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2006/06/mmr-is-back/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2006/06/mmr-is-back/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Jun 2006 17:06:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MMR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scare stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[telegraph]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[times]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=249</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ben Goldacre 3rd June 2006 The Guardian [Mmmm uh-oh I've just found out the Guardian newsdesk have cut this by 200 words while I was having an afternoon snooze. I can't bear to look. Anyway, here's what I wrote...] MMR is back. &#8220;US scientists back autism link to MMR&#8221; squealed the Telegraph. &#8220;Scientists fear MMR [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2006/06/mmr-is-back/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>67</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>

