<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://articles.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>Double-blind Studies Not Always Superior</title><link>http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2000/07/16/double-blind-studies.aspx</link><description>Conventional wisdom has always suggested that only clinical trials conducted under strictly controlled conditions can accurately determine if a treatment works. However, two new reports show that two different study types yield similar results, even though</description><dc:language>en</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2008.5 SP1 (Build: 31106.3070)</generator></channel></rss>