<?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: The Krankcycle: Another Reason to Avoid the Gym</title>
	<atom:link href="http://coedmagazine.com/2007/12/14/krankcycle-another-reason-to-avoid-the-gym/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://coedmagazine.com/2007/12/14/krankcycle-another-reason-to-avoid-the-gym/</link>
	<description>College, Lifestyle and Ladies</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2009 23:37:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Rick</title>
		<link>http://coedmagazine.com/2007/12/14/krankcycle-another-reason-to-avoid-the-gym/comment-page-1/#comment-14128</link>
		<dc:creator>Rick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Feb 2009 14:45:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://coedmagazine.com/sports/Health-Fitness/4260#comment-14128</guid>
		<description>I feel compelled to comment on such a biased and un-educated piece of journalism (I apologise to any other journalists that may get to read this).Why would a person who has been &quot;to the gym a total of four times in my entire life, and never plan on going again&quot; be given the task of reporting on a topic they have no knowledge of nor do they appear interested in learning about it either? This goes to whoever distributes these reporting jobs,why? 

The only reference made to other opinions of the KrankCycle was from a person not with opposing views to the journalist,but exactly the same.What is achieved by that? I can understand having opposing views in a report,it would make for constructive reading,to show &quot;both sides of the same coin&quot; but to show a report of equally poor lack of education,knowledge &amp; professionalism reeks of un-profeesionalism.As for the writer&#039;s final line,that merely shows his lack of class...and possibly age too.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I feel compelled to comment on such a biased and un-educated piece of journalism (I apologise to any other journalists that may get to read this).Why would a person who has been &#8220;to the gym a total of four times in my entire life, and never plan on going again&#8221; be given the task of reporting on a topic they have no knowledge of nor do they appear interested in learning about it either? This goes to whoever distributes these reporting jobs,why? </p>
<p>The only reference made to other opinions of the KrankCycle was from a person not with opposing views to the journalist,but exactly the same.What is achieved by that? I can understand having opposing views in a report,it would make for constructive reading,to show &#8220;both sides of the same coin&#8221; but to show a report of equally poor lack of education,knowledge &amp; professionalism reeks of un-profeesionalism.As for the writer&#8217;s final line,that merely shows his lack of class&#8230;and possibly age too.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
