<?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/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Women and non-smokers need not apply</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.journalclub.org/2005/02/01/n51/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.journalclub.org/2005/02/01/n51</link>
	<description>Comments on the medical literature</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Jul 2005 13:30:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: james gault</title>
		<link>http://www.journalclub.org/2005/02/01/n51/comment-page-1#comment-2436</link>
		<dc:creator>james gault</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 May 2005 12:54:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.journalclub.org/2005/02/01/n51#comment-2436</guid>
		<description>I agree completely.The &quot;harms&quot; do not outweigh the benefits.It is just that the number of deaths prevented is-in the view of the USPSTF-too low to be worthwhile.&quot;Worthwhile&quot; is in the eye of the beholder and viewed by the Task Force from the point of view of some nebulous,non-existent single payer of medical bills,which is not how it works in a free society.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree completely.The &#8220;harms&#8221; do not outweigh the benefits.It is just that the number of deaths prevented is-in the view of the USPSTF-too low to be worthwhile.&#8221;Worthwhile&#8221; is in the eye of the beholder and viewed by the Task Force from the point of view of some nebulous,non-existent single payer of medical bills,which is not how it works in a free society.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

