
<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:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
>

<channel>
	<title>The Narwhal | News on Climate Change, Environmental Issues in Canada</title>
	<link>https://thenarwhal.ca</link>
  <description><![CDATA[Deep Dives, Cold Facts, &#38; Pointed Commentary]]></description>
  <language>en-US</language>
  <copyright>Copyright 2026 The Narwhal News Society</copyright>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 May 2026 02:06:58 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	
	    <item>
      <title>Dr. David Schindler: Tar Sands Science &#8220;Shoddy,&#8221; &#8220;Must Change&#8221;</title>
      <link>https://thenarwhal.ca/schindler-tar-sands-science-shoddy-must-change/?utm_source=rss</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost.com/narwhal/2012/11/22/schindler-tar-sands-science-shoddy-must-change/</guid>
			<pubDate>Thu, 22 Nov 2012 13:00:00 +0000</pubDate>			
			<description><![CDATA[If you ask an Environment Canada media spokesperson about contamination resulting from tar sands operations, they will not tell you the federal government has failed to adequately monitor the mega-project&#39;s effects on water. They most certainly will not say outright that the federal government has failed to monitor the long term or cumulative environmental effects...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<figure><img width="354" height="480" src="https://thenarwhal.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Tar-Sands-shadow-by-KK.jpg" class="attachment-banner size-banner wp-post-image" alt="" decoding="async" fetchpriority="high" srcset="https://thenarwhal.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Tar-Sands-shadow-by-KK.jpg 354w, https://thenarwhal.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Tar-Sands-shadow-by-KK-347x470.jpg 347w, https://thenarwhal.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Tar-Sands-shadow-by-KK-332x450.jpg 332w, https://thenarwhal.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Tar-Sands-shadow-by-KK-15x20.jpg 15w" sizes="(max-width: 354px) 100vw, 354px" /><figcaption><small><em></em></small></figcaption><hr></figure><p>If you ask an Environment Canada media spokesperson about contamination resulting from tar sands operations, they will not tell you the federal government has failed to adequately monitor the mega-project's effects on water.<p>	They most certainly will not say outright that the federal government has failed to monitor the long term or cumulative environmental effects of the world's largest industrial project. They won't say it, but not because it isn't the case.&nbsp;</p><p>The tar sands are contaminating hundreds of kilometres of land in northern Alberta with cancer-causing contaminants and neurotoxins.</p><p>	And although federal scientists have confirmed this, they are prevented from sharing information about their research with the media.&nbsp;</p>
	In fact, if a journalist wants to approach a public servant scientist these days, he or she is required to follow the federal ministry's media relations protocol, one which strictly limits the media's access to scientists, sees scientists media trained by communications professionals who coach them on their answers, determine beforehand which questions can be asked or answered, and monitor the interaction to ensure federal employees stay within the preordained parameters.
<p>	The result is an overly-monitored process that causes burdensome delays in media-scientist interactions. The overwhelming consequence is that the media has stopped talking to the country's national scientists.</p>
	&nbsp;
	But University of Alberta scientist Dr. David Schindler is ready and willing to pick up the slack, especially after Environment Canada federal scientists recently presented findings that vindicated years of <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/107/37/16178.long" rel="noopener">Schindler's contentious research</a> exposing the negative effects of tar sands production on local waterways and aquatic species.
	&nbsp;
	According to Schindler, the rapid expansion of the tar sands is not based on valid science: "Both background studies and environmental impact assessments have been shoddy, and could not really even be called science. This must change," he told DeSmog.<p><!--break--></p>
	Federal scientists Jane Kirk, David Muir and Joanne Parrott <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2012/11/14/tar-sands-are-toxic-federal-scientists-present-evidence-spread-contaminants-affects-fish" rel="noopener">presented official Environment Canada findings</a> two weeks ago at a conference in California that confirmed tar sands related contaminants are not only polluting waterways in the immediate region, but in <a href="http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/Federal+scientists+uncover+evidence+that+oilsands+contaminants+travel+further+than+expected/7542920/story.html#ixzz2C9pE0cF6" rel="noopener">pristine areas over 100 kilometres away</a>, and with contaminants &ndash; <a href="http://toxics.usgs.gov/definitions/pah.html" rel="noopener">polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons</a> &ndash; known to cause cancer in humans. The research team also discovered contaminants carried in snowfall are transporting the toxins to tributaries where hatchlings spend their early days. Laboratory tests showed snow melt is <a href="http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/Federal+scientists+uncover+evidence+that+oilsands+contaminants+travel+further+than+expected/7542920/story.html#ixzz2C9pE0cF6" rel="noopener">fatal to young minnows</a>.&nbsp;
	&nbsp;
	The federal scientists' findings have given new strength to the <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/107/37/16178.long" rel="noopener">overshadowed research of Schindler</a>, who concluded years ago that further monitoring and scientific studies were immediately necessary to ensure adequate protection of the local wildlife, fish species and communities that live off the land.&nbsp;
	&nbsp;
	One such community is located in <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Chipewyan,_Alberta" rel="noopener">Fort Chipewyan</a>, located 220 kilometers downstream of the tar sands on the shores of Lake Athabasca. Fort Chipewyan is also home to the <a href="http://www.acfn.com/" rel="noopener">Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation</a>, a community that lives off the land, trapping, hunting and fishing year round.
<p>	No federal studies have researched contamination in furbearing mammals living near the tar sands, although species decline &ndash; as is evident in the&nbsp;<a href="http://desmogblog.com/crywolf" rel="noopener">disappearance&nbsp;of caribou</a> &ndash; is becoming an increasing problem.</p>
	&nbsp;
	In 2003 and 2004, the public was shocked to hear that high levels of rare colon and bile-duct <a href="http://www2.canada.com/edmontonjournal/news/cityplus/story.html?id=6951e2e4-76fc-4bd1-b32e-8a6e045be0c1" rel="noopener">cancers plagued the community of Fort Chipewyan</a>. Family physician John O'Connor, who discovered the problem, was charged with <a href="http://www2.canada.com/edmontonjournal/news/cityplus/story.html?id=6951e2e4-76fc-4bd1-b32e-8a6e045be0c1" rel="noopener">professional misconduct </a>in 2007 by Health Canada. The federal body accused the practitioner of causing 'undue alarm' in the community and subsequently blocked O'Connor's access to patient files.
<p>	The<a href="http://www.albertahealthservices.ca/500.asp" rel="noopener"> Alberta Cancer Board confirmed in 2008</a> that higher than normal rates of rare cancer were present in the small community. The government refused to remove the charge of alarmism from O'Connor's file until late 2009, despite <a href="http://www2.canada.com/edmontonjournal/news/cityplus/story.html?id=6951e2e4-76fc-4bd1-b32e-8a6e045be0c1" rel="noopener">express wishes from the residents of Fort Chipewyan</a> to have the accusation dropped.</p>
	&nbsp;
	But Dr. O'Connor is not the only cautious voice to receive heavy-handed treatment from the government when it comes to unwanted information regarding the tar sands. Dr. Schindler's findings regarding contamination originating from the tar sands was publicly called into question by the provincial government who <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/08/30/us-oilsands-environment-idUSTRE67T3H920100830" rel="noopener">accused Schindler of scientific bias</a>. At the time the provincial government claimed contaminants in the watershed were <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/story/2010/08/31/oilsands-ramp-kuzmic.html" rel="noopener">naturally occurring</a>.
	&nbsp;
	The recent release of <a href="http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/Federal+scientists+uncover+evidence+that+oilsands+contaminants+travel+further+than+expected/7542920/story.html#ixzz2C9pE0cF6" rel="noopener">federal science confirming Schindler's research</a> has reignited concerns over the safety of wildlife, aquatic species and communities living in the massive contamination zone surrounding tar sands operations. It has also renewed calls for further study into <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/story/2010/09/16/edmonton-oilsands-deformed-fish.html" rel="noopener">deformed fish surfacing in Lake Athabasca</a>.&nbsp;
	&nbsp;
	DeSmog posed five questions to Dr. Schindler. What he had to say was surprisingly candid, given the tight-lipped disposition of federal scientists and the absence of powerful scientific voices in mainstream media.&nbsp;
	&nbsp;
	<em>1. Is there a relation between deformed fish in Lake Athabasca and the recently-released Environment Canada studies that have found tar sands related contaminants in water?&nbsp;</em>
	&nbsp;
	It is impossible to say with certainty. Earlier studies by Environment Canada and Queen's University scientists showed that fish eggs hatched on bitumen contaminated sediments had high mortalities, and that the few survivors had malformations, which were described as like those observed in adult fish caught near Fort Chipewyan. The abstract by Parrott et al. also shows that when contaminated snow melts and runs off, it is toxic. I think a connection is very probable. Note that there are similar incidences of fish malformations downstream of polluted sites in the Great Lakes Basin, and downstream of Superfund sites.
	&nbsp;
	<em>2. Have industry and government done an adequate job of ensuring the health of the local landscape, wildlife and communities in the region surrounding the tar sands?&nbsp;</em>
	&nbsp;
	Absolutely not. Monitoring studies by RAMP [<a href="http://www.ramp-alberta.org/RAMP.aspx" rel="noopener">Regional Aquatics and Monitoring Program</a>] and Alberta Environment have been poorly done, according to recent panel reports. A health study of Fort Chipewyan was recommended in the final report of the Northern River Basins study in 1996, and it has still not been done. Caribou are in decline, and probably not recoverable. Many predatory mammals and boreal song birds are also in decline.
	&nbsp;
	<em>3. Has environmental monitoring been in place to ensure local First Nations, who live off the land and water, are safe in doing so?</em>
	&nbsp;
	No. The studies that have been done have been very poor, using poor statistical designs, inadequate sampling, and chemical methods with poor limits of detection.
	&nbsp;
	<em>4. Is there any relation between unhealthy fish and elevated rates of cancer in Fort Chipewyan? If people are eating fish that have been exposed to high levels of <a href="http://water.epa.gov/scitech/methods/cwa/pollutants-background.cfm#pp" rel="noopener">priority contaminants</a> (like methyl mercury), could that affect the health of those individuals? What about repeated exposure for those individuals who are eating the fish, local game, and drinking the water?</em>
	&nbsp;
	This is impossible to tell without considerable further study. Mercury is likely not linked to cancer, it is a neurotoxin. Fish have high mercury, but no diagnostic test results have been released for people. The most likely carcinogens are some of the poorly studied polycyclic aromatic compounds.&nbsp;
	&nbsp;
	<em>5. In your opinion have the decisions regarding the rapid expansion of the tar sands been made on sound science?</em>
	&nbsp;
	No. Both background studies and environmental impact assessments have been shoddy, and could not really even be called science. This must change.
	&nbsp;</p>
<p><em><strong>The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by <a href="https://thenarwhal.ca/newsletter/?utm_source=rss">signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism</a>.</strong></em></p>]]></content:encoded>
      <dc:creator><![CDATA[Carol Linnitt]]></dc:creator>
						<category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[Athabasca]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[bile duct cancer]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[Cancer]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[contaminants]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[David Muir]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[David Schindler]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[deformed fish]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[environmental monitoring]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[federal scientists]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[Fort Chipewyan]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[Harper Government]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[Interview]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[Jane Kirk]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[Joanne Parrott]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[John O'Connor]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[Lake Athabasca]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[methyl mercury]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[mutated fish]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[muzzling of scientists]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[oil sands]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[PAHs]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[Q &amp; A]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[tar sands]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[Water Contamination]]></category>    </item>
	    <item>
      <title>&#8220;Stephen Harper Hates Science&#8221;: Federal Scientists Muzzled to Protect Tar Sands Reputation</title>
      <link>https://thenarwhal.ca/stephen-harper-hates-science-federal-government-muzzles-scientists-protect-tar-sands-reputation/?utm_source=rss</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost.com/narwhal/2012/11/08/stephen-harper-hates-science-federal-government-muzzles-scientists-protect-tar-sands-reputation/</guid>
			<pubDate>Thu, 08 Nov 2012 18:33:52 +0000</pubDate>			
			<description><![CDATA[The Canadian government is working hard behind the scenes to cover up the negative effects that tar sands extraction is having on the local environment, wildlife, communities and the global climate. According to Access to Information documents obtained by Postmedia&#39;s Mike De Souza, the Stephen Harper government has actively suppressed the release of vital information...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<figure><img width="480" height="480" src="https://thenarwhal.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/gagged-scientist_final.jpg" class="attachment-banner size-banner wp-post-image" alt="" decoding="async" srcset="https://thenarwhal.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/gagged-scientist_final.jpg 480w, https://thenarwhal.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/gagged-scientist_final-160x160.jpg 160w, https://thenarwhal.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/gagged-scientist_final-470x470.jpg 470w, https://thenarwhal.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/gagged-scientist_final-450x450.jpg 450w, https://thenarwhal.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/gagged-scientist_final-20x20.jpg 20w" sizes="(max-width: 480px) 100vw, 480px" /><figcaption><small><em></em></small></figcaption><hr></figure><p>The Canadian government is working hard behind the scenes to cover up the negative effects that tar sands extraction is having on the local environment, wildlife, communities and the global climate. According to<a href="http://www.theprovince.com/news/Oilsands+Environment+Canada+confirms+contamination/7515181/story.html" rel="noopener"> Access to Information documents</a> obtained by Postmedia's <a href="http://o.canada.com/author/mikejdesouza/" rel="noopener">Mike De Souza</a>, the <a href="https://thenarwhal.ca/stephen-harper"><strong>Stephen Harper</strong></a> government has actively suppressed the release of vital information regarding the spread of tar sands contamination by muzzling federal scientists.<p>The gag order, according to De Souza, came on the heels of a newly researched government report in November 2011 which confirmed the findings of University of Alberta scientists Erin N. Kelly and David Schindler. The scientists <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/107/37/16178.long" rel="noopener">discovered concentrations of toxics such as heavy metals were higher near tar sands operations</a>, showing a positive correlation between tar sands activity and the spread of contaminants in the local environment.</p><p>The government of Canada and the government of Alberta <a href="http://www.theprovince.com/news/Oilsands+Environment+Canada+confirms+contamination/7515181/story.html" rel="noopener">denied the correlation</a>, saying local waterways tested showed no signs of toxic contamination and reports of mutated and cancerous fish downstream from the tar sands were unfounded.</p><p><!--break--></p><p>The <a href="http://www.theprovince.com/news/Oilsands+Environment+Canada+confirms+contamination/7515181/story.html" rel="noopener">document uncovered by De Souza</a> shows that federal scientists who could confirm the University of Alberta results were <a href="http://www.theprovince.com/news/Oilsands+Environment+Canada+confirms+contamination/7515181/story.html" rel="noopener">restricted from speaking to the media</a>: "If scientists are approached for interviews at the conference, the [Environment Canada] communications policy will be followed by referring the journalist to the media relations&hellip;phone number. An appropriate spokesperson will then be identified depending on journalist questions."</p><p>Federal scientists were also <a href="http://www.theprovince.com/news/Oilsands+Environment+Canada+confirms+contamination/7515181/story.html" rel="noopener">given a list of scripted responses</a>, explaining government tests in the spring of 2010 showed no toxics in the Athabasca River and established no links between contaminants and abnormal and sick fish.</p><p>Scientists were also directed to avoid questions regarding environmental monitoring of the tar sands and the role Environment Canada plays in the region with this scripted line: "I am a scientist. I'm not in a position to answer that question but I'd be happy to refer you to an appropriate spokesperson."</p><p><img alt="" src="https://thenarwhal.ca/wp-content/uploads/files/gagged-scientist_final.jpg"></p><p>David Schindler, co-author of the 2010 University of Alberta study <a href="http://www.theprovince.com/news/Oilsands+Environment+Canada+confirms+contamination/7515181/story.html" rel="noopener">commented,</a> "it is a good study, and [the author] is a very fine young scientist, who should be trusted to comment on her own results."</p><p>"Similarly, Derek Muir, her supervisor and co-author, is one of the world's top contamination experts, and <strong>Canadians should be ashamed that he cannot discuss results directly with the public, but must go through an official spokesperson</strong>."</p><p>In 2010, the results of <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/107/37/16178.long" rel="noopener">Kelly and Schindler's contaminant analysis </a>caused an uproar in Alberta and federal governments. Eager to promote expansion in the tar sands, the Canadian government failed to install a sound and independent monitoring system for the region.</p><p>	Any data used to support the government's official position, that no contamination had occurred, was supplied by the oil and gas industry.</p><p>Schindler conducted a basic analysis of waterways in the region, sampling water both upstream from tar sands operations, and downstream. What Schindler and his team discovered was a <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/107/37/16178.long" rel="noopener">considerable accumulation of pollutants in water downstream from tar sands</a> development which includes open-pit mining and refining.</p><p>Most notably, Schindler discovered that airborne pollutants were being deposited on land, far from contaminated waterways like the Athabasca River. It was Schindler who first recognized the role<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/andrew-d-miall/alberta-oil-sands_b_906070.html" rel="noopener"> snow</a> was playing in the transportation and depositing of tar sands pollution.</p><p>These land-based pollutants mirrored contamination of waterways. <a href="http://www.greenparty.ca/sites/greenparty.ca/files/attachments/a_comprehensive_guide_to_the_alberta_oil_sands_-_may_20111.pdf" rel="noopener">Schindler found</a> that "embryos of fish exposed to oilsands' water and sediment have very high rates of mortality, and among the survivors, there are very <a href="http://www.edmontonsun.com/news/alberta/2010/09/16/15374696.html" rel="noopener">high rates of deformities</a>."</p><p>His research confirmed the concerns of local communities, First Nations and environmental groups that the fast-tracking of tar sands expansion without careful monitoring was having negative effects on the environment and those living downstream.</p><p>The findings also contradicted research conducted by the industry/government group <a href="http://www.ramp-alberta.org/RAMP.aspx" rel="noopener">Regional Aquatics Monitoring Program</a> (RAMP), a group <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/08/30/us-oilsands-environment-idUSTRE67T3H920100830" rel="noopener">Schindler claims</a> "violated every rule" of long-term study.</p><p>In perhaps one of Canada's most scandalous moments in recent history, Dr. Schindler was publicly discredited by the provincial and federal government. His research and his credibility were <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/08/30/us-oilsands-environment-idUSTRE67T3H920100830" rel="noopener">called into question </a>when the Alberta government went on record to say his study &ndash; which was published in the prestigious <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/107/37/16178.long" rel="noopener">Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences</a> &ndash; was biased and that contaminants in the region's watershed occur <em>naturally</em> and not as a result of industrial activities.</p><p>The treatment Schindler received as a result of his research concerned scientists across Canada, many of whom felt the federal government was conduction a 'witch hunt' to silence information that might fuel opposition to the tar sands.</p><p>Schindler's experience was just one of many reasons why scientists from across Canada held a mock memorial this summer on Parliament Hill, mourning the "<a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2012/07/10/pol-death-evidence-protest-parliament-hill.html" rel="noopener">Death of Evidence</a>," caused by the muzzling of scientists by the federal government.</p><p>The motto of the event was clear: "<a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2012/07/10/pol-death-evidence-protest-parliament-hill.html" rel="noopener">Stephen Harper Hates Science</a>."</p><p>To this day no clear environmental monitoring program is in place to track and analyze the effects that tar sands extraction and refining has on the local environment. Last month the Alberta government announced the creation of <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/17/us-alberta-oilsands-idUSBRE89G1PP20121017" rel="noopener">a new scientific body to monitor the impacts of development,</a> which Diana McQueen, the province's Environment Minister, suggests will be 'credible' and operate at an 'arms-length' from industry and government. The plan, however, has yet to take any real shape.</p><p>"This is yet another plan to develop a plan," <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/17/us-alberta-oilsands-idUSBRE89G1PP20121017" rel="noopener">said Greenpeace energy and climate campaigner Mike Hudema</a>. "There is still no funding commitment and no clear governance model to ensure independence. The province should stop approving new projects based on flawed data and incomplete information until this gets sorted out."</p><p>
	<em>Image credit: <a href="http://jodistark.ca/About_Jodi.html" rel="noopener">Jodi Stark</a></em></p></p>
<p><em><strong>The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by <a href="https://thenarwhal.ca/newsletter/?utm_source=rss">signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism</a>.</strong></em></p>]]></content:encoded>
      <dc:creator><![CDATA[Carol Linnitt]]></dc:creator>
						<category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[access to information]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[Athabasca River]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[contamination]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[corruption]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[David Schindler]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[death of evidence]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[Derek Muir]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[Diana McQueen]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[Environment Minister]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[environmental monitoring]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[federal scientists]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[Government]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[greenpeace]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[Mike Hudema]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[mutated fish]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[muzzling]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[oilsands]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[Postmedia]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[RAMP]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[Science]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[snow]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[tar sands]]></category><category domain="post_tag"><![CDATA[Toxic]]></category>    </item>
	</channel>
</rss>