http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/national/78698068/174-000-Kiwis-left-off-surgery-waiting-lists-with-Cantabrians-and-Aucklanders-faring-worst

This was covered in Morning Report as well - with one comment saying
that it is false economy, as operations earlier would save money.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)

On Mon, 11 Apr 2016 09:39:11 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/national/78698068/174-000-Kiwis-left-off-surgery-waiting-lists-with-Cantabrians-and-Aucklanders-faring-worst

This was covered in Morning Report as well - with one comment saying
that it is false economy, as operations earlier would save money.

Hospital founder Phil Bagshaw says his data shows unmet need is higher in Canterbury.

has a smell of a vested interest

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)

On 11/04/2016 9:39 a.m., Rich80105 wrote:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/national/78698068/174-000-Kiwis-left-off-surgery-waiting-lists-with-Cantabrians-and-Aucklanders-faring-worst

This was covered in Morning Report as well - with one comment saying
that it is false economy, as operations earlier would save money.

Did you listen to Little on the radio this morning Rich? Seems to have
accepted the loss of 2017 election. But we could have told him that.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)

On Monday, 11 April 2016 09:39:04 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/national/78698068/174-000-Kiwis-left-off-surgery-waiting-lists-with-Cantabrians-and-Aucklanders-faring-worst

This was covered in Morning Report as well - with one comment saying
that it is false economy, as operations earlier would save money.

The survey is that more people are being left off lists. What is more important
is the outputs from the health system - how many procedures completed etc. And to complete the picture, is the growth in outputs matching the growth in population/demand?

From the cited article:

"Just over 167,000 elective surgeries were carried out in the 2014-15 financial
year, up 41 per cent from five years earlier."

Sounds like good progress to me. I doubt the population has increased that much.

Numbers left off waiting lists is not meaningful. It could be that more people are trying to get procedures they just don't need yet.

But anyway, the research is based on random online sampling off the electoral roll and claims to better than asking the GPs. Really? Sounds like BS. I would be rather dubious of this guys polling - especially if he is using it to get himself more funding!
I would trust the GPs before him. His argument that GPs are missing people because they can't afford to visit GPs makes no sense. How would you get referred and then declined if you didn't see a GP?

So basically he's saying that he's asked people who have not seen a GP to assess themselves as to whether the'd make the list or not?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)

On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 18:49:16 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:

On Monday, 11 April 2016 09:39:04 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/national/78698068/174-000-Kiwis-left-off-surgery-waiting-lists-with-Cantabrians-and-Aucklanders-faring-worst

This was covered in Morning Report as well - with one comment saying
that it is false economy, as operations earlier would save money.

The survey is that more people are being left off lists. What is more important is the outputs from the health system - how many procedures completed

etc. And to complete the picture, is the growth in outputs matching the growth in population/demand?
Being left off lists is the way National are keeping the lists shorter
than they otherwise would be.

From the cited article:

"Just over 167,000 elective surgeries were carried out in the 2014-15 financial year, up 41 per cent from five years earlier."

No its not - an aging and increasing population is being met by
reductions in the overall health budget - this is just part of that
reduction in the real level of funding.

Sounds like good progress to me. I doubt the population has increased that much.

I suspect you doubt anything you would rather not be reality.

Numbers left off waiting lists is not meaningful. It could be that more people

are trying to get procedures they just don't need yet.
They don't get put on the waiting list without a doctor referring
them. It is the hopsitals that then take them off to keep the lists
shorter.

But anyway, the research is based on random online sampling off the electoral roll and claims to better than asking the GPs. Really? Sounds like BS. I would be rather dubious of this guys polling - especially if he is using it to get himself more

funding! I would trust the GPs before him. His argument that GPs are missing people because they can't afford to visit GPs makes no sense. How would you get
referred and then declined if you didn't see a GP?
A solid research technique - similar reallyt to polling for party
support

So basically he's saying that he's asked people who have not seen a GP to assess themselves as to whether the'd make the list or not?

No he isn't.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)

On Mon, 11 Apr 2016 11:04:54 +1200, Liberty <liberty48@live.com>
wrote:

On Mon, 11 Apr 2016 09:39:11 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/national/78698068/174-000-Kiwis-left-off-surgery-waiting-lists-with-Cantabrians-and-Aucklanders-faring-worst

This was covered in Morning Report as well - with one comment saying
that it is false economy, as operations earlier would save money.

Hospital founder Phil Bagshaw says his data shows unmet need is higher in Canterbury.

has a smell of a vested interest

Do you dispute that the numbers indicate that Canrtabrians and
Aucklanders are faring worst?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)

On Mon, 11 Apr 2016 10:32:51 +1200, Fred <dryrot@hotmail.com> wrote:

On 11/04/2016 9:39 a.m., Rich80105 wrote:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/national/78698068/174-000-Kiwis-left-off-surgery-waiting-lists-with-Cantabrians-and-Aucklanders-faring-worst

This was covered in Morning Report as well - with one comment saying
that it is false economy, as operations earlier would save money.

Did you listen to Little on the radio this morning Rich? Seems to have >accepted the loss of 2017 election. But we could have told him that.

Why the attempt at distraction, Fred? Are you embarassed at the
growing problems relating to surgery waiting lists?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)

On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 20:33:03 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:

On Monday, 11 April 2016 14:15:32 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:

On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 18:49:16 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:

On Monday, 11 April 2016 09:39:04 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/national/78698068/174-000-Kiwis-left-off-surgery-waiting-lists-with-Cantabrians-and-Aucklanders-faring-worst

This was covered in Morning Report as well - with one comment saying
that it is false economy, as operations earlier would save money.

The survey is that more people are being left off lists. What is more important is the outputs from the health system - how many procedures completed

etc. And to complete the picture, is the growth in outputs matching the growth in population/demand?

Being left off lists is the way National are keeping the lists shorter
than they otherwise would be.

Now you just revert to telling stupid, obvious lies.

National do not leave people off lists. Medical professionals do. Do you have some sort of syndrome where you reflexively blame everything on National?

Are you claiming that it is contrary to National policy?

From the cited article:

"Just over 167,000 elective surgeries were carried out in the 2014-15 financial year, up 41 per cent from five years earlier."

No its not - an aging and increasing population is being met by
reductions in the overall health budget - this is just part of that
reduction in the real level of funding.

Sounds like good progress to me. I doubt the population has increased that much.

I suspect you doubt anything you would rather not be reality.

Of course the population has not increased 41% in 5 years you hopeless moron. I haven't said it did!

Elective surgery is a subset of all surgery, and for all you know the definition has changed over the last five years . . .

Numbers left off waiting lists is not meaningful. It could be that more people are trying to get procedures they just don't need yet.

They don't get put on the waiting list without a doctor referring
them. It is the hopsitals that then take them off to keep the lists
shorter.

Oh, but just before you said National did it. Get your story straight will you?

Of course National politicians do not make decisions in individual
cases - they set the policies though.

But dragging your lifeless little brain back to the topic, those people don't just see a hospital specialist without a referral from a GP. They must get a GP

referral first.

But anyway, the research is based on random online sampling off the electoral roll and claims to better than asking the GPs. Really? Sounds like BS. I would be rather dubious of this guys polling - especially if he is using it to get himself more

funding! I would trust the GPs before him. His argument that GPs are missing people because they can't afford to visit GPs makes no sense. How would you get
referred and then declined if you didn't see a GP?

A solid research technique - similar really to polling for party
support

Desperation seeps from your pores, Dickbot.

So basically he's saying that he's asked people who have not seen a GP to assess themselves as to whether the'd make the list or not?

No he isn't.

You don't get it because you're too dumb, bro.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)

On 11/04/2016 3:33 p.m., JohnO wrote:

On Monday, 11 April 2016 14:15:32 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:

On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 18:49:16 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:

On Monday, 11 April 2016 09:39:04 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/national/78698068/174-000-Kiwis-left-off-surgery-waiting-lists-with-Cantabrians-and-Aucklanders-faring-worst

This was covered in Morning Report as well - with one comment saying
that it is false economy, as operations earlier would save money.

The survey is that more people are being left off lists. What is more important is the outputs from the health system - how many procedures completed

etc. And to complete the picture, is the growth in outputs matching the growth in population/demand?

Being left off lists is the way National are keeping the lists shorter
than they otherwise would be.

Now you just revert to telling stupid, obvious lies.

National do not leave people off lists. Medical professionals do. Do you have

some sort of syndrome where you reflexively blame everything on National?


It's his Labour good, National bad syndrome JohnO. The dirty little
Labour trolls been suffering from since before he found NZ gen and
started trolling it.

From the cited article:

"Just over 167,000 elective surgeries were carried out in the 2014-15 financial year, up 41 per cent from five years earlier."

No its not - an aging and increasing population is being met by
reductions in the overall health budget - this is just part of that
reduction in the real level of funding.

Sounds like good progress to me. I doubt the population has increased that much.

I suspect you doubt anything you would rather not be reality.

Of course the population has not increased 41% in 5 years you hopeless moron.

Do stop confusing Rich with facts that go against the shonky polling
from his 'rich prick' friend. It only confuses the dirty widdle troll.

Numbers left off waiting lists is not meaningful. It could be that more people are trying to get procedures they just don't need yet.

They don't get put on the waiting list without a doctor referring
them. It is the hopsitals that then take them off to keep the lists
shorter.

Oh, but just before you said National did it. Get your story straight will

you?

But dragging your lifeless little brain back to the topic, those people don't

just see a hospital specialist without a referral from a GP. They must get a GP
referral first.

But anyway, the research is based on random online sampling off the electoral roll and claims to better than asking the GPs. Really? Sounds like BS. I would be rather dubious of this guys polling - especially if he is using it to get himself more

funding! I would trust the GPs before him. His argument that GPs are missing people because they can't afford to visit GPs makes no sense. How would you get
referred and then declined if you didn't see a GP?

A solid research technique - similar reallyt to polling for party
support

Desperation seeps from your pores, Dickbot.

Probably makes Rich smell like shit like most of his posts.

So basically he's saying that he's asked people who have not seen a GP to assess themselves as to whether the'd make the list or not?

No he isn't.

You don't get it because you're too dumb, bro.

JohnO unlike Rich the dumb can't help it. Though the fact they can't
help themselves is a perfect description of the ever trolling dirty
politics practising Rich.


Pooh

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)

On Monday, 11 April 2016 14:15:32 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:

On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 18:49:16 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:

On Monday, 11 April 2016 09:39:04 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/national/78698068/174-000-Kiwis-left-off-surgery-waiting-lists-with-Cantabrians-and-Aucklanders-faring-worst

This was covered in Morning Report as well - with one comment saying
that it is false economy, as operations earlier would save money.

The survey is that more people are being left off lists. What is more

important is the outputs from the health system - how many procedures completed
etc. And to complete the picture, is the growth in outputs matching the growth in population/demand?

Being left off lists is the way National are keeping the lists shorter
than they otherwise would be.

Now you just revert to telling stupid, obvious lies.

National do not leave people off lists. Medical professionals do. Do you have some sort of syndrome where you reflexively blame everything on National?

From the cited article:

"Just over 167,000 elective surgeries were carried out in the 2014-15

financial year, up 41 per cent from five years earlier."

No its not - an aging and increasing population is being met by
reductions in the overall health budget - this is just part of that
reduction in the real level of funding.

Sounds like good progress to me. I doubt the population has increased that

much.

I suspect you doubt anything you would rather not be reality.

Of course the population has not increased 41% in 5 years you hopeless moron.

Numbers left off waiting lists is not meaningful. It could be that more

people are trying to get procedures they just don't need yet.

They don't get put on the waiting list without a doctor referring
them. It is the hopsitals that then take them off to keep the lists
shorter.

Oh, but just before you said National did it. Get your story straight will you?

But dragging your lifeless little brain back to the topic, those people don't just see a hospital specialist without a referral from a GP. They must get a GP
referral first.

But anyway, the research is based on random online sampling off the

electoral roll and claims to better than asking the GPs. Really? Sounds like BS. I would be rather dubious of this guys polling - especially if he is using it to get himself more
funding! I would trust the GPs before him. His argument that GPs are missing people because they can't afford to visit GPs makes no sense. How would you get
referred and then declined if you didn't see a GP?

A solid research technique - similar reallyt to polling for party
support

Desperation seeps from your pores, Dickbot.

So basically he's saying that he's asked people who have not seen a GP to

assess themselves as to whether the'd make the list or not?

No he isn't.

You don't get it because you're too dumb, bro.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)

On Monday, 11 April 2016 15:59:15 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:

On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 20:33:03 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:

On Monday, 11 April 2016 14:15:32 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:

On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 18:49:16 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:

On Monday, 11 April 2016 09:39:04 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/national/78698068/174-000-Kiwis-left-off-surgery-waiting-lists-with-Cantabrians-and-Aucklanders-faring-worst

This was covered in Morning Report as well - with one comment saying
that it is false economy, as operations earlier would save money.

The survey is that more people are being left off lists. What is more

important is the outputs from the health system - how many procedures completed
etc. And to complete the picture, is the growth in outputs matching the growth in population/
demand?

Being left off lists is the way National are keeping the lists shorter
than they otherwise would be.

Now you just revert to telling stupid, obvious lies.

National do not leave people off lists. Medical professionals do. Do you

have some sort of syndrome where you reflexively blame everything on National?

Are you claiming that it is contrary to National policy?

*What* is contrary to National policy, dimwit? What policy are you talking about? And be specific.

From the cited article:

"Just over 167,000 elective surgeries were carried out in the 2014-15

financial year, up 41 per cent from five years earlier."

No its not - an aging and increasing population is being met by
reductions in the overall health budget - this is just part of that
reduction in the real level of funding.

Sounds like good progress to me. I doubt the population has increased

that much.

I suspect you doubt anything you would rather not be reality.

Of course the population has not increased 41% in 5 years you hopeless

moron.

I haven't said it did!

Yes you did. Me: "I doubt the population has increased that much." i.e. 41% You: "I suspect you doubt anything you would rather not be reality."

It is therefore logically complete that you therefore think 41% population growth is not reality.

Elective surgery is a subset of all surgery, and for all you know the definition has changed over the last five years . . .

"For all we know"? That is pathetic. Especially given "all *you* know" is basically nil.

Numbers left off waiting lists is not meaningful. It could be that more

people are trying to get procedures they just don't need yet.

They don't get put on the waiting list without a doctor referring
them. It is the hopsitals that then take them off to keep the lists
shorter.

Oh, but just before you said National did it. Get your story straight will

you?

Of course National politicians do not make decisions in individual
cases - they set the policies though.

OK, what policy, on the evaluation of eligibility for surgical waiting lists, has changed in the current government. Give me something specific instead of your usual throwing of faeces against the wall.

But dragging your lifeless little brain back to the topic, those people

don't just see a hospital specialist without a referral from a GP. They must get a GP referral first.

But anyway, the research is based on random online sampling off the

electoral roll and claims to better than asking the GPs. Really? Sounds like BS. I would be rather dubious of this guys polling - especially if he is using it to get himself more
funding! I would trust the GPs before him. His argument that GPs are missing people because they can't afford to visit GPs makes no sense. How would you get
referred and then declined if you didn't see a GP?

A solid research technique - similar really to polling for party
support

Desperation seeps from your pores, Dickbot.

So basically he's saying that he's asked people who have not seen a GP to

assess themselves as to whether the'd make the list or not?

No he isn't.

You don't get it because you're too dumb, bro.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)