<?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; MMR</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.badscience.net/category/mmr/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>A staggeringly weak interview of Andrew Wakefield on the Today programme</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2010/05/a-staggeringly-weak-interview-of-andrew-wakefield-on-the-today-programme/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2010/05/a-staggeringly-weak-interview-of-andrew-wakefield-on-the-today-programme/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 May 2010 10:09:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MMR]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=1642</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Uninformed reporter fails to present even the most basic GMC allegations of misrepresenting individual patients findings. You can listen to it here: news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_8700000/8700062.stm When your interviewee &#8211; who has been found guilty by the GMC of misrepresenting his own scientific findings, and conducting dangerous experiments on children without ethics committee clearance, in a clearly laid [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2010/05/a-staggeringly-weak-interview-of-andrew-wakefield-on-the-today-programme/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>47</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Wakefield MMR verdict</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2010/01/the-wakefield-mmr-verdict/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2010/01/the-wakefield-mmr-verdict/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jan 2010 20:25:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MMR]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=1491</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here&#8217;s a very brief piece I bashed out for the Guardian newsdesk today on the Wakefield finding, the further reading below will be more helpful if you&#8217;re interested in the story. Ben Goldacre, The Guardian, Thursday 28 January 2009 In medicine, “untoward incident inquiries” tend to look for systems failures, rather than one individual to [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2010/01/the-wakefield-mmr-verdict/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>133</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>Christ I need a haircut</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2009/03/christ-i-need-a-haircut/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2009/03/christ-i-need-a-haircut/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Mar 2009 13:40:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MMR]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/2009/03/christ-i-need-a-haircut/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here’s a fun piece I did with Nick Wallis for ITV London on Monday. Bad hair, ridiculous venue changes, and tiggerish over-excitablility aside, I think it’s actually quite good, and the wholesome outro at the end made me want to give Alastair Stewart a great big cuddle. So there you go. They took out some [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2009/03/christ-i-need-a-haircut/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>77</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Pay to play?</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2009/02/pay-to-play/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2009/02/pay-to-play/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Feb 2009 00:01:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[competing interests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MMR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulating research]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/2009/02/pay-to-play/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ben Goldacre Saturday February 14 2009 The Guardian This column is about tainted medical research, not MMR. Now don&#8217;t get me wrong: it&#8217;s still an interesting week to be right about vaccines. On Sunday, Brian Deer at the Times claimed that the medical cases in Andrew Wakefield&#8217;s 1998 paper were altered before publication. The measles [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2009/02/pay-to-play/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>46</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>LBC, MMR, Jeni Barnett, an Early Day Motion, the Times, and, er, a bit of Stephen Fry&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2009/02/lbc-mmr-jeni-barnett-an-early-day-motion-the-times-and-er-a-bit-of-stephen-fry/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2009/02/lbc-mmr-jeni-barnett-an-early-day-motion-the-times-and-er-a-bit-of-stephen-fry/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Feb 2009 16:35:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dangers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jeni barnett]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LBC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal chill]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MMR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulating media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scare stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stifling criticism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/2009/02/lbc-mmr-jeni-barnett-an-early-day-motion-the-times-and-er-a-bit-of-stephen-fry/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I thought since a few days have passed that I should let you know what&#8217;s happening with the slightly ridiculous LBC situation. If you skip to the bottom you will find a discussion on some mischievous activism which I think has great potential. Since LBC unwisely threw their legal weight around to prevent you from [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2009/02/lbc-mmr-jeni-barnett-an-early-day-motion-the-times-and-er-a-bit-of-stephen-fry/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>154</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Er, &#8220;help&#8221;. Legal Chill from LBC 97.3 and &#8220;Global Radio&#8221; over Jeni Barnett&#8217;s MMR scaremongering</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2009/02/legal-chill-from-lbc-973-over-jeni-barnetts-mmr-scaremongering/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2009/02/legal-chill-from-lbc-973-over-jeni-barnetts-mmr-scaremongering/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Feb 2009 21:32:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Global Radio]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jeni barnett]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal chill]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MMR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stifling criticism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/2009/02/legal-chill-from-lbc-973-over-jeni-barnetts-mmr-scaremongering/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[Update: recent developments are now available here, including an EDM in parliament and discussion in mainstream media] [Update: links to transcripts and audio hosted elsewhere at bottom of post] One more thing, since Stephen Fry excellently tweeted this post to his 8 billion followers (weirdly he wakes me up every morning) I&#8217;ve had to activate [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2009/02/legal-chill-from-lbc-973-over-jeni-barnetts-mmr-scaremongering/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>234</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bad Science Bingo, with Jeni Barnett&#8230; NOW with added legal chill</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2009/02/bad-science-bingo/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2009/02/bad-science-bingo/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Feb 2009 23:00:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jeni barnett]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LBC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MMR]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/2009/02/bad-science-bingo/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sorry I had no column in the paper this week, there&#8217;s some very good fun stuff coming in the next month if I can pull it together safely. Meanwhile, in case any of you are feeling complacent, I offer you this truly magnificent performance on MMR by Jeni Barnett from LBC Radio on the 7th [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2009/02/bad-science-bingo/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>146</slash:comments>
<enclosure url="http://badscience.net/files/Jeni_Barnett_-_MMR_Section_Full.mp3" length="42358491" type="audio/mpeg" />
		</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>More crap journals?</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2008/10/more-crap-journals/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2008/10/more-crap-journals/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Oct 2008 00:38:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MMR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mondo academico]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[publication bias]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulating research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[utter nonsense]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/2008/10/more-crap-journals/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ben Goldacre The Guardian Saturday October 4 2008 Important and timely news from the Journal of Medical Hypotheses this week: ejaculating could be &#8220;a potential treatment of nasal congestion in mature males.&#8221; My reason for bothering you with this will become clear later. The first thing to note is that this is not an entirely [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2008/10/more-crap-journals/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>22</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The media&#8217;s MMR hoax</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2008/08/the-medias-mmr-hoax/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2008/08/the-medias-mmr-hoax/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Aug 2008 06:50:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[badscience]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MMR]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/2008/08/the-medias-mmr-hoax/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This is an extract from my new book &#8220;Bad Science&#8220;, in the Guardian today. It&#8217;s out on Monday: my recommendation is that you buy it, and give it to someone who disagrees with you. Ben Goldacre The Guardian Saturday August 30 2008 Dr Andrew Wakefield is in front of the General Medical Council on charges [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2008/08/the-medias-mmr-hoax/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>76</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Homeopathy gives you Aids</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/09/homeopathy-gives-you-aids/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2007/09/homeopathy-gives-you-aids/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2007 23:01:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[homeopathy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MMR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[placebo]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=531</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ben Goldacre The Guardian September 15th, 2007 Okay now look: there’s nothing wrong with the idea of homeopaths giving out sugar pills. The placebo effect can be very powerful, because it’s not just about the pill, it’s about the cultural meaning of the treatment: so we know from research that four placebo sugar pills a [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2007/09/homeopathy-gives-you-aids/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>60</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Observer MMR story disappears from archives &#8211; updated</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/07/observer-mmr-story-disappears-from-archives/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2007/07/observer-mmr-story-disappears-from-archives/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:41:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[MMR]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=468</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Lots of people have emailed in to say that the Observer&#8217;s spectacularly misleading MMR story has been removed from the archive and is no longer available online. observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2121521,00.html For obvious reasons of propriety I have studiously avoided having an inside track on anything to do with this piece from the beginning, so I have no [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2007/07/observer-mmr-story-disappears-from-archives/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>44</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Observer makes another hash of &#8220;clarifying&#8221; and persists in trying to cover up its mistakes</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/07/the-observer-makes-a-slightly-better-job-of-clarifying/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2007/07/the-observer-makes-a-slightly-better-job-of-clarifying/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Jul 2007 23:51:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[MMR]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=464</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[They still don&#8217;t seem to understand the problems with the one in 58 figure, and they still don&#8217;t seem to be able to understand the report they keep going on about (but won&#8217;t let anyone see because they think their scientific evidence is top secret), and they are still covering up their mistakes. At first, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2007/07/the-observer-makes-a-slightly-better-job-of-clarifying/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>52</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>MMR and The Observer &#8211; a nation waits</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/07/mmr-and-the-observer/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2007/07/mmr-and-the-observer/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Jul 2007 22:18:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[MMR]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=463</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;ve been told by Dr Fiona Scott that the main news editor of the Observer phoned her today, and she has been promised that there will be a large article in tomorrow&#8217;s Observer [EDIT it's up now, here] reproducing in full and unedited the comments that she ended up posting, in desperation, in the commentisefree [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2007/07/mmr-and-the-observer/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The MMR story that wasn&#8217;t</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/07/the-mmr-story-that-wasnt/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2007/07/the-mmr-story-that-wasnt/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jul 2007 23:42:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[MMR]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=457</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Bad science Ben Goldacre Wednesday July 18, 2007 The Guardian Whatever you think about Andrew Wakefield, the real villains of the MMR scandal are the media. Just one week before his GMC hearing, yet another factless &#8220;MMR causes autism&#8221; news story appeared: and even though it ran on the front page of our very own [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2007/07/the-mmr-story-that-wasnt/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>36</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Loopy blog competition, and field reports from the GMC</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/07/field-reports-from-the-gmc/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2007/07/field-reports-from-the-gmc/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jul 2007 16:45:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MMR]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=454</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I thought you might be amused by this email nugget I just got from a journalist friend who was covering the GMC yesterday. it was tragi-comedy at the GMC this morning&#8230; really sad to see the deification of Wakefield by all these desperate parents who cling on to him as their hero in absence of [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2007/07/field-reports-from-the-gmc/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>40</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>I am not unwell</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/07/i-am-not-unwell/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2007/07/i-am-not-unwell/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2007 00:56:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MMR]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=452</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thank you for your emails, I am not unwell, nor have I died &#8220;in a strange sexual experiment that went horribly wrong&#8221;. As people suspected I was hoping to write about the Observer&#8217;s astonishing front page story on MMR, in fact I was hoping to do it for the comment pages last weds, but then [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2007/07/i-am-not-unwell/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>33</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;Try Me, Sh*thead&#8221; &#8211; the strange case of Carol Stott, Wakefield, and the Observer &#8211; including bizarre update</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/07/try-me-shithead-the-strange-case-of-stott-wakefield-and-the-observer/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2007/07/try-me-shithead-the-strange-case-of-stott-wakefield-and-the-observer/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 08 Jul 2007 13:13:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MMR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scare stories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=445</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Update 10:30pm Sunday 8/7/07: Just got this reply from Dr Scott, in response to my email below: she seems to say the Observer have concocted something, but it&#8217;s certainly vague. Have asked her for clarification, but no response (still none as of 17:15 9/7/07 despite various emails and phone call). [i should clarify that sincec [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2007/07/try-me-shithead-the-strange-case-of-stott-wakefield-and-the-observer/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>40</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Blairs&#8217; Witch Project</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/05/the-blairs-witch-project/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2007/05/the-blairs-witch-project/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 May 2007 23:40:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[alternative medicine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dangers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MMR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[religion]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=411</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ben Goldacre Saturday May 12, 2007 The Guardian So normally you just wouldn&#8217;t bother with the New Age stuff. The people are pretty friendly and harmless, and they tend not to make too many scientific claims. But Tony Blair stepped over some pretty significant lines. In 2002 he refused to say whether his son Leo [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2007/05/the-blairs-witch-project/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>69</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

