<?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: Three more Fujii papers fall for lack of IRB approval</title>
	<atom:link href="http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/2012/06/18/three-more-fujii-papers-fall-for-lack-of-irb-approval/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/2012/06/18/three-more-fujii-papers-fall-for-lack-of-irb-approval/</link>
	<description>Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 18:18:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Carlisle</title>
		<link>http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/2012/06/18/three-more-fujii-papers-fall-for-lack-of-irb-approval/#comment-15561</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[John Carlisle]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Jun 2012 18:39:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/?p=8240#comment-15561</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[You might need to add a few more (total 172): see http://jen.jiji.com/jc/eng?g=eco&amp;k=2012062901008]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You might need to add a few more (total 172): see <a href="http://jen.jiji.com/jc/eng?g=eco&#038;k=2012062901008" rel="nofollow">http://jen.jiji.com/jc/eng?g=eco&#038;k=2012062901008</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
