<?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: AMAnals</title>
	<atom:link href="http://duncancross.net/2009/06/amanals/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://duncancross.net/2009/06/amanals/</link>
	<description>ill. humored.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 12:02:36 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: In all fairness &#171; DUNCAN CROSS</title>
		<link>http://duncancross.net/2009/06/amanals/comment-page-1/#comment-1121</link>
		<dc:creator>In all fairness &#171; DUNCAN CROSS</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Jun 2009 17:46:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://duncancross.net/?p=1559#comment-1121</guid>
		<description>[...] caught flak from stargirl65 for implying that the AMA represents all doctors, so I feel obliged to point out the joint [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] caught flak from stargirl65 for implying that the AMA represents all doctors, so I feel obliged to point out the joint [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dx</title>
		<link>http://duncancross.net/2009/06/amanals/comment-page-1/#comment-1114</link>
		<dc:creator>dx</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Jun 2009 01:26:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://duncancross.net/?p=1559#comment-1114</guid>
		<description>@stargirl65 - I hear you, and I don&#039;t mean to imply that the AMA actually represents all or even most doctors; Tim Foley&#039;s post even says only about 20% of doctors are members of the AMA. 

The problem is that the AMA is the most visible, most respected organization of doctors when it comes to public policy. When the AMA says something, the folks in Washington figure they speak for most or all doctors. We need a lot more doctors saying that&#039;s not true before it starts to sink in.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@stargirl65 &#8211; I hear you, and I don&#8217;t mean to imply that the AMA actually represents all or even most doctors; Tim Foley&#8217;s post even says only about 20% of doctors are members of the AMA. </p>
<p>The problem is that the AMA is the most visible, most respected organization of doctors when it comes to public policy. When the AMA says something, the folks in Washington figure they speak for most or all doctors. We need a lot more doctors saying that&#8217;s not true before it starts to sink in.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: stargirl65</title>
		<link>http://duncancross.net/2009/06/amanals/comment-page-1/#comment-1111</link>
		<dc:creator>stargirl65</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Jun 2009 18:16:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://duncancross.net/?p=1559#comment-1111</guid>
		<description>I am a doctor and I do not belong to the AMA and never have.  They have never represented my best interests.

You might want to see what percent of practicing doctors actually are members in the AMA.  Also what percent of primary care doctors are members.  If you check around, the AMA is not well respected or liked by even many doctors.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am a doctor and I do not belong to the AMA and never have.  They have never represented my best interests.</p>
<p>You might want to see what percent of practicing doctors actually are members in the AMA.  Also what percent of primary care doctors are members.  If you check around, the AMA is not well respected or liked by even many doctors.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
