Seriously piss offThat sounds like cancel culture to me! From the right, who knew?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Seriously piss offThat sounds like cancel culture to me! From the right, who knew?
Well ok. I can cede that point because it makes sense. You sound like an analytical person.Sigh. Here's how they record the data mate:
It is literally if someone says they identify as say four ethnicities, it's a standardised way of distilling that information so they are only counted in the stats once.
So its not priority in care, its priority in stats.
So just to clarify, your opinion is a conspiracy that you feel is being inacted in front of everyone's eyes so that makes you balanced and your opinion factual? In your opinion.In your opinion.
Mine is, sure it's a conspiracy, but it's actually being enacted in front of your very eyes. So, I think quite balanced really, especially as it's factual
His first part was fact. Followed by an assumption based on this fact. In my opinion.In your opinion. Sorry Inruin, just borrowing your phrase, completely appropriate context I think.
You are conflating two seperate things..Well ok. I can cede that point because it makes sense. You sound like an analytical person.
So following on from this, the distillation of data upweights one race over the other based on the priorities. This will result in that race being:
A) over represented in medical conditions, and
B) allocated more medical care than someone else who ticks only a non-priority box
So by its nature of data collection, it inherently favours the prioritised fields
And that’s in addition to actual prioritisation of surgery lists by non-medical bureaucrats
Those stats are used to make decisions and therefore they are flawed.Sigh. Here's how they record the data mate:
It is literally if someone says they identify as say four ethnicities, it's a standardised way of distilling that information so they are only counted in the stats once.
So its not priority in care, its priority in stats.
How are they flawed? Its literally recording of patients dataThose stats are used to make decisions and therefore they are flawed.
Example - my mother needs medication that is free to Maori and not to her. She has the exact same critical need as any Maori.
These protocols are used all across govt. eg I know for a fact education uses the same priority based racial system.Sigh. Here's how they record the data mate:
It is literally if someone says they identify as say four ethnicities, it's a standardised way of distilling that information so they are only counted in the stats once.
So its not priority in care, its priority in stats.
Did you read anything I wrote? The priority system is for the recording of data, nothing to do with medical priority.These protocols are used all across govt. eg I know for a fact education uses the same priority based racial system.
So the question is, can you answer if a Maori or a European is more lively to be under achieving in school if all multiethnic Maori/ European children are not included as European?
And we then make funding decisions based on trash data…
As I said, the same priority system is used across multiple govt departments.Did you read anything I wrote? The priority system is for the recording of data, nothing to do with medical priority.
Please read this and tell me its the same priority system, your are conflating two seperate things.As I said, the same priority system is used across multiple govt departments.
In education there are annual surveys that default children to the highest priority race. These surveys are used to determine funding for programmes, where resources are spent, changes to the curriculum, etc.
They are quoted in news releases and used to inform debates.
And are misinformation.
It’s 41 pages mate. I’m saying the govt is using data that skews it towards priority outcomes and it’s wrong.Please read this and tell me its the same priority system, your are conflating two seperate things.
You are confusing the argument, I am not talking about that.It’s 41 pages mate. I’m saying the govt is using data that skews it towards priority outcomes and it’s wrong.
Why record ethnicity data?You are confusing the argument, I am not talking about that.
I am talking about the way they record ethnicity data, its got nothing to do with what you are talking about.
I present you with facts that you refuse to look at and think its got to do with a seperate issue![]()
No idea. The 'why' is not what I was addressing, it's people misrepresenting this priority in a picture as something that its not.Why record ethnicity data?
Example of misinformation quoted in media:Actions and outcomes, not disinformation should the yardstick.
That's wiz. Facts get steam hollered in his neoliberal worldYou are confusing the argument, I am not talking about that.
I am talking about the way they record ethnicity data, its got nothing to do with what you are talking about.
I present you with facts that you refuse to look at and think its got to do with a seperate issue![]()