Posts by James Butler
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: People Take Drugs, in reply to Russell Brown,
No one seemed willing to say on Drug Bust how much that helicopter operation cost.
Maybe the Police could piggy-back on the Air Force's helicopter training runs?
-
While the Bay of Plenty times demands that drugs be stamped out, and the law made, if anything, harsher
Wow, that editorial is a cracker. Writing this:
But decriminalising cannabis for minor personal use will not stop the problems it causes.
and then this:
But alcohol has been such an ingrained part of our social fabric for years it would be next to impossible for any government to ban it and stay in power.
Thousands use it responsibly and tightening its use for young people and those who use it irresponsibly is a more sensible tactic.
is the most heroic tolerance for cognitive dissonance I have ever seen. Also:
The Law Commission [...] would be better to spend its time working out how to cut crime rather than trying to relax the country's laws.
Gosh, I hope they're grateful to the BOPT for reminding them what their real job is.
-
Hard News: Some Lines for Labour, in reply to JLM,
It would be interesting to have a reality-based scale for all the political parties.
Of course, reality has a well-known liberal bias.
-
Hard News: Some Lines for Labour, in reply to JLM,
Like James, I’m a member, and I’m thinking of putting up a workshop at the next policy conference with the proposition that “evidence-based policy” becomes a fifth principle. That should generate a good discussion!
Ooh please do. It'll be one more excuse for me to go.
-
Hard News: Some Lines for Labour, in reply to Islander,
Right, but that's quite different from empowering a profession who sell placebos on the explicit premise that they're not placebos.
-
Hard News: Some Lines for Labour, in reply to Bart Janssen,
Bart, if this:
My understanding of Ms Kedgely's stance is that until such time as we develop our own policy we should leave them unregulated. I am pretty certain I have heard her say that on the news (I may be remembering incorrectly).
is the best example you can come up with, then arguably this:
when the public announcements of the Green MPs stop including what I believe is non-science
has already come to pass.
-
Hard News: Some Lines for Labour, in reply to Mikaere Curtis,
James you are conflating personal health choices with governmental addiction to large scale roading projects. Surely you can see a problem with that comparison ?
Mikaere, I see where you are coming from, but points 1 and 2 about incorporating complementary therapies into the public health system. This is more problematic than “personal health choices” for two reasons: firstly that it would most likely result in public subsidies for these practitioners and therapies, and second that legislation bears some responsibility to incentivise effective over ineffective choices, especially when public money is at stake. Which segues nicely into your second point…
Also, nothing in the policy precludes efficacy-based decisioning in terms of which products/therapies to include.
Do you know what happens to “alternative” or “complementary” therapies that are proven to be efficacious? They get appropriated by conventional medicine. And this is a good thing, because whatever reservations one might (and should!) have about the pharmaceutical and healthcare industries, they are still the best mechanism we have for determining what are safe and effective therapies.
Also, I like your new word “decisioning” :-)
-
Hard News: Some Lines for Labour, in reply to James Butler,
At least one in four New Zealanders uses complementary therapies, and Aotearoa/New Zealand has an extensive network of complementary healthcare practitioners.
Also, while I'm at it, the Greens know that "Everyone does it" is a poor argument when Steven Joyce uses it to justify excessive spending on roads; it's still a poor argument when used to support funding ineffective, unproven healthcare products.
-
Hard News: Some Lines for Labour, in reply to Andrew E,
Oh dear. So much of that is just snake oil.
That's my fear - so much of the policy hangs on the definitions of words like "restrictive", "safe" and "effective".
-
Hard News: Some Lines for Labour, in reply to izogi,
I’m probably missing things but I just did a quick Google of the Greens’ website, and there are very few mentions of the word Naturopathy.
Not naturopathy specifically, but this is official policy:
6. Complementary Health Care
At least one in four New Zealanders uses complementary therapies, and Aotearoa/New Zealand has an extensive network of complementary healthcare practitioners. The Green Party wants to see better integration of complementary health providers in primary and secondary care, to improve safety and meet the health needs of New Zealanders. The Green Party will:
1) Establish a Complementary Health Care Unit within the Ministry of Health to facilitate the integration of selected complementary health practices and therapies into the public health system.
2) Provide District Health Boards with resources to integrate complementary health therapies and practitioners into PHO and hospital care, to provide multidisciplinary health services.
3) Encourage complementary health practitioners to form strong self-regulation to standardise peer review and training, and encourage statutory regulation of complementary health practitioners through the Health Professionals Competence Assurance Act where relevant.
4) Implement the recommendations of the Ministerial Advisory Committee on Complementary and Alternative Health (MACCAH).
5) Expand funding for the Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) database to further develop researcher and practitioner understanding of the role and safety of complementary therapies in the treatment of illness.
6) Facilitate access to a wide range of safe and effective dietary supplements.
7) Ensure Aotearoa/New Zealand retains regulatory control of the dietary supplements industry and does not proceed with government plans for restrictive trans-Tasman regulation of dietary supplements.3 and is sound policy; 4, 5, 6 and 7 may or may not be, it's hard to tell without going and looking up what eg. the Ministerial Advisory Committee on Complementary and Alternative Health actually says; 1 and 2 are IMHO terrible ideas, and form one of the few beefs I have with the party of which I am a member. On the other hand, I haven't seen any Green press release actually mentioning this bit of the policy, well, ever.