<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	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:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Patrick Holford Responds to Radio 4 Programme and Misses the Point: To Be Fair, So Does Stephanie Fox</title>
	<atom:link href="http://holfordwatch.info/2008/04/02/patrick-holford-responds-to-radio-4-programme-and-misses-the-point-to-be-fair-so-does-stephanie-fox/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://holfordwatch.info/2008/04/02/patrick-holford-responds-to-radio-4-programme-and-misses-the-point-to-be-fair-so-does-stephanie-fox/</link>
	<description>The truth about Patrick Holford, media nutritionist</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 14 Oct 2011 15:11:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kat</title>
		<link>http://holfordwatch.info/2008/04/02/patrick-holford-responds-to-radio-4-programme-and-misses-the-point-to-be-fair-so-does-stephanie-fox/comment-page-1/#comment-9012</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kat]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Apr 2008 09:32:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://holfordwatch.info/?p=392#comment-9012</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Eveningperson, I&#039;d say it was even more important. If there are serious criticisms of your work, as a scientist, it would be a good idea to give them the serious consideration needed, and maybe review your hypothesis before blindly bashing on along a path which may be deeply flawed.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Eveningperson, I&#8217;d say it was even more important. If there are serious criticisms of your work, as a scientist, it would be a good idea to give them the serious consideration needed, and maybe review your hypothesis before blindly bashing on along a path which may be deeply flawed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: eveningperson</title>
		<link>http://holfordwatch.info/2008/04/02/patrick-holford-responds-to-radio-4-programme-and-misses-the-point-to-be-fair-so-does-stephanie-fox/comment-page-1/#comment-9011</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[eveningperson]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Apr 2008 08:24:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://holfordwatch.info/?p=392#comment-9011</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Answering serious criticisms of your work is as important a part of science as &#039;researching new studies and writing books&#039;.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Answering serious criticisms of your work is as important a part of science as &#8216;researching new studies and writing books&#8217;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

