<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://blogs.mercola.com/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>Studies, Basic Premise of Health Research, Frequently Flawed</title><link>http://blogs.mercola.com/sites/vitalvotes/archive/2005/08/16/Studies-Basic-Premise-of-Health-Research-Frequently-Flawed.aspx</link><description>I told you last month about a Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) review that found as many as a third of the studies published over 13 years (1990-2003) whose results were contradicted or overblown . An interesting piece in yesterday's</description><dc:language>en</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2008.5 SP1 (Build: 31106.3070)</generator></channel></rss>