<?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>The Black Hole: Science in Canada, Issues affecting trainees &#187; Peer Review</title>
	<atom:link href="http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/tag/peer-review/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog</link>
	<description>Science in Canada:  Issues affecting trainees</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 03 May 2012 14:31:39 +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 Difficult Pill to Swallow: The Harsh Realities of a 15% Funding Rate</title>
		<link>http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2012/04/12/a-difficult-pill-to-swallow-the-harsh-realities-of-a-15-funding-rate/</link>
		<comments>http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2012/04/12/a-difficult-pill-to-swallow-the-harsh-realities-of-a-15-funding-rate/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Apr 2012 15:59:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Financial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[biomedical research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CIHR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Education: The PhD Factory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fellowship]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[funding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[funding rates]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Graduate Student]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[grant funding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NIH]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PDF]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Peer Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PhD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postdoc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[R01 grants]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Training]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United States]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[University]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/?p=1563</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A country&#8217;s biomedical advancement and innovation is intimately linked to its investment in academic research (Measure for Measure: Chemical Research &#38; Development Powers the U.S. Innovation Engine). Funding for research comes almost entirely from government and private donors (Stossel, T.P., &#8230; <a href="http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2012/04/12/a-difficult-pill-to-swallow-the-harsh-realities-of-a-15-funding-rate/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2012/04/12/a-difficult-pill-to-swallow-the-harsh-realities-of-a-15-funding-rate/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Who do universities want to hire &#8211; scientists or politicians?</title>
		<link>http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2012/02/09/who-do-universities-want-to-hire-scientists-or-politicians/</link>
		<comments>http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2012/02/09/who-do-universities-want-to-hire-scientists-or-politicians/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 20:24:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dave</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Education and Training]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science Communication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CIHR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[degrees]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[education]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Employment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fellowship]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[funding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Graduate Student]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jobs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[life choices]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NSERC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PDF]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Peer Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PhD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Post Doc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[publications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scholarship]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[science and society]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scientist metric]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[selling science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SSHRC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Training]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[University]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/?p=1464</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In his article The Vanishing Voter, Harvard professor Thomas Patterson makes a statement about modern political campaigns that made me a little nauseous: Ambition, manipulation, and deception have become as prominent as issues of policy and leadership You might scoff at &#8230; <a href="http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2012/02/09/who-do-universities-want-to-hire-scientists-or-politicians/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2012/02/09/who-do-universities-want-to-hire-scientists-or-politicians/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Identifying good scientists and keeping them honest</title>
		<link>http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2011/05/22/identifying-good-scientists-and-keeping-them-honest/</link>
		<comments>http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2011/05/22/identifying-good-scientists-and-keeping-them-honest/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 May 2011 22:54:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dave</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Education and Training]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cambridge]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CMAJ]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[doctors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[education]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fellowship]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[funding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Graduate Student]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[grantsmanship]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Journals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lab Times]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[life choices]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Medical Research Council]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nature]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[non-academic jobs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PDF]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Peer Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Peter Lawrence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PLoS ONe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Post Doc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postacademic jobs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Retraction Watch]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[royal society]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[science and society]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scientific ombudsman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Training]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[University]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/?p=1158</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a February 2011 interview with Lab Times, Cambridge scientist Peter Lawrence1 reflects on his own career and complains that &#8220;the heart of research is sick&#8221; as he charts the changes in the way in which science is pursued.  Briefly, &#8230; <a href="http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2011/05/22/identifying-good-scientists-and-keeping-them-honest/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2011/05/22/identifying-good-scientists-and-keeping-them-honest/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>CMAJ calls for &#8220;new mechanisms to ensure academic integrity&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2011/05/11/academic-integrity/</link>
		<comments>http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2011/05/11/academic-integrity/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 May 2011 05:30:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Beth</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[academic integrity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Peer Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[publishing]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/?p=1149</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A while back I posted a link to Retraction Watch, a website that reports on research papers being retracted (e.g., due to the science contained within them being fraudulent). Well, yesterday an editorial in the Canadian Medical Association Journal (CMAJ) &#8230; <a href="http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2011/05/11/academic-integrity/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2011/05/11/academic-integrity/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Reducing medical (science) waste: Thinking before doing&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2011/03/26/reducing-medical-science-waste-thinking-before-doing/</link>
		<comments>http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2011/03/26/reducing-medical-science-waste-thinking-before-doing/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Mar 2011 12:19:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dave</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Education and Training]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Financial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cambridge]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[core facility]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[degrees]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[discovery]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Employment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fellowship]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[funding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Graduate Student]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[knowledge economoy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[knowledge translation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[non-academic jobs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Peer Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PhD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Post Doc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science journal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sustainable lab practice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Training]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[University]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/?p=1078</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I was sitting down with a group of scientists following a football/soccer game the other day and dropped a bomb into the conversation by asking if people thought cancer research got too much money.  Nobody, myself included, disputed the obvious &#8230; <a href="http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2011/03/26/reducing-medical-science-waste-thinking-before-doing/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2011/03/26/reducing-medical-science-waste-thinking-before-doing/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>New Metrics for Assessing Scientists: Let&#8217;s Accessorize</title>
		<link>http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2011/02/07/new-metrics-for-assessing-scientists-lets-accessorize/</link>
		<comments>http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2011/02/07/new-metrics-for-assessing-scientists-lets-accessorize/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Feb 2011 16:49:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dave</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Education and Training]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[education]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[faculty of 1000]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[funding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Graduate Student]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[h factor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[h-index]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Journals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PDF]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Peer Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PhD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Post Doc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scholarship]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[science and society]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Training]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[University]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/?p=1022</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Quick Hit: Paul Krzyzanowski, another post doctoral fellow who writes for the Stem Cell Network blog just posted The underused academic in which he discusses funding levels of Canadian postdoctoral fellows and the balance of funding International imports vs. Canadian &#8230; <a href="http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2011/02/07/new-metrics-for-assessing-scientists-lets-accessorize/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2011/02/07/new-metrics-for-assessing-scientists-lets-accessorize/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;Questionable&#8221; Projects: Does the public have the answer?</title>
		<link>http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2011/01/13/questionable-projects-does-the-public-have-the-answer/</link>
		<comments>http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2011/01/13/questionable-projects-does-the-public-have-the-answer/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Jan 2011 01:53:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Beth</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Financial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[funding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Peer Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[research funding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[science and society]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/?p=999</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The other day, this article from Live Science was brought to our attention: &#8220;Republicans Call for Public Scrutiny of NSF grants&#8221;  http://www.livescience.com/culture/etc/101201-republicans-call-for-public-scrutiny-nsf.html From the article: Republican Majority Leader-Elect Eric Cantor (R-VA) is asking citizens to choose their own cuts to &#8230; <a href="http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2011/01/13/questionable-projects-does-the-public-have-the-answer/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2011/01/13/questionable-projects-does-the-public-have-the-answer/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>New Metrics for Assessing Scientists: Collaboration Networks</title>
		<link>http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2010/10/18/new-metrics-for-assessing-scientists-collaboration-networks/</link>
		<comments>http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2010/10/18/new-metrics-for-assessing-scientists-collaboration-networks/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Oct 2010 13:27:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dave</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Education and Training]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[collaboration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[collaboration networks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Counting Collaboration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Daniel Cressy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[degrees]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[doctors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[education]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Employment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[falsely constructed consensus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[funding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MCAT fever]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nature retraction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[non-academic jobs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Peer Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[publication record]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scientist metric]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[transferrable skills]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[University]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/?p=795</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Two of the most common complaints heard over coffee in medical science labs and the source of much mental anguish are 1) &#8220;Is there any hope in getting a Cell, Science or Nature paper&#8221; followed by 2) &#8220;Does my career &#8230; <a href="http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2010/10/18/new-metrics-for-assessing-scientists-collaboration-networks/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2010/10/18/new-metrics-for-assessing-scientists-collaboration-networks/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Perception, Power and Principles:  Human induced climate change and why people have trouble accepting the science</title>
		<link>http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2010/03/22/perception-power-and-principles-human-induced-climate-change-and-why-people-have-trouble-accepting-the-science/</link>
		<comments>http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2010/03/22/perception-power-and-principles-human-induced-climate-change-and-why-people-have-trouble-accepting-the-science/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Mar 2010 23:12:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dave</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science Communication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bob watson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CAPS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[climate change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[climate gate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[greenhouse effect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IPCC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[life choices]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nigel lawson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Peer Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[science and society]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science Communcation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[science literacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[science outreach]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[temperature rises]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/?p=290</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[***Quick Hit: The CAPS petition to maintain the competitiveness of a postdoctoral research career in Canada is up to 1750 signatures. For more information on why this petition has been written, read my last post and visit the CAPS website. &#8230; <a href="http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2010/03/22/perception-power-and-principles-human-induced-climate-change-and-why-people-have-trouble-accepting-the-science/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2010/03/22/perception-power-and-principles-human-induced-climate-change-and-why-people-have-trouble-accepting-the-science/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Quarterly Summary – Trying to make sense of it all</title>
		<link>http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2009/12/30/quarterly-summary-trying-to-make-sense-of-it-all/</link>
		<comments>http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2009/12/30/quarterly-summary-trying-to-make-sense-of-it-all/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Dec 2009 23:01:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dave</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Financial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jobs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science Communication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CAPS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CIHR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[degrees]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[doctors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Employment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fellowship]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[funding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Graduate Student]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Journals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[life choices]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MBA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[non-academic jobs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NSERC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PDF]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Peer Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PhD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Post Doc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postacademic jobs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scholarship]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science Communcation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[science communication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[science literacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[science outreach]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SSHRC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Summary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Training]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[transferrable skills]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[University]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UofT PDA]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/?p=198</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[So, in the wake of a very busy December, I realize that we only registered two blog entries this month - a noticeable drop from November’s eleven.  But this is the realistic way forward if we want to tackle these issues with the time and energy they deserve, as these “issues affecting trainees” underpin many of the important decisions that are made in an academic career and give decision makers a sense of what trainees are thinking.  It’s a lot of information though and in recognition of everyone else being busy as well, I thought a quarterly summary of highlights would be a good idea. <a href="http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2009/12/30/quarterly-summary-trying-to-make-sense-of-it-all/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2009/12/30/quarterly-summary-trying-to-make-sense-of-it-all/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

