Professor John Robertson OBA
The ‘Scottish’ media are positively frothing with delight at the above one-quarter dip in the the number of patients treated for cancer within 62 days:
What’s wrong with the above reporting?
First, they are, of course, not mentioning the bits in bold below reporting increased demand:
There were 4,373 eligible referrals for the 62-day standard, an increase of 1.5% from the previous quarter, 1.8% from the quarter ending 31 March 2024, and 17.5% from the quarter ending 31 December 2019, the last full quarter pre-pandemic. 68.9% of patients started treatment within 62 days, compared with 73.5% in the previous quarter, 70.5% in the quarter ending 31 March 2024, and 83.7% in the quarter ending 31 December 2019.
Second and more important, quarterly variations often reflect the seasons in which they occur. Look again at the graph and you’ll see that the last three winter Q1s (January to March) all feature a dip below that of the other more temperate quarters.
In winter there are more staff absences and more patient call-offs.
Were you intelligent and/or honest enough to look at just the trend over the last 3 Q1s, you might find little headline-worthy:
The median wait for the last 3 QIs were 50, 50 and 52 days – a 4% increase in the time waited- not much to work with is there?
Talking-up Scotland 'Albatraz' 
5 weeks ago, my 80-yo mother went to her doctor, having found a suspicious lump when self-checking. She was referred to our local hospital and had an appointment date that was two-weeks after having seen the doctor. She then had the tests done within a week of seeing the doctor. Then she had the op within a week of that. Four weeks. 80y/o. Cynics might have expected that due to her age that she’d be deprioritised. TOP CLASS cancer treatment in Scotland.
LikeLiked by 7 people
The media, Thick or Sneaky? You do pose some tricky questions prof. Giving them the benefit of the doubt and the armsfull of university honours degrees they no doubt have, I have to settle for Sneaky. Close call though.
LikeLiked by 2 people
one of the after effects of covid is an increased risk of cancer. This imho accounts for the higher demand for treatment and subsequent delay.
LikeLiked by 2 people
All very well but this does not suit MSM as its not SNP bad I had a look on BBC Scotland site did not read the article but noticed 241 comments at the end out of that lot i bet 99% are all SNP bad.
LikeLiked by 2 people
That’s another interesting aspect of the furrner version of the BBC website – The 241 comments you noted don’t exist….
LikeLiked by 2 people
I don’t know what you mean comments don’t exist so I have posted this from the article.Haviing gone back to the story I found this.
Figures show that almost a third of patients are waiting longer for treatment
The percentage of Scottish cancer patients receiving treatment within the target time is the lowest since records began, new figures show.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Let me explain it thus – If I click on your link – I see a figure in red momentarily then the article reverts to that I had archived below, only live – No comments.
If I go direct to the BBC site and the same article, again no comments.
That’s what I’ve been on about for over a year – There is a UK version and at least a non-UK version of the BBC website, they are manipulating who can see what, likely by the IP address – It’s only a matter of time before you could be reading a different BBC article to that of your neighbour even though allegedly the same…. It’s a deeply sinister and worrying propaganda development..
Do you understand now ?
About 6 months after I first noticed everything but BBC’s Scotland and Scotland Politics pages disappear, I asked an old Scots pal in Michigan if she saw the same – She was shocked but confirmed it, she hadn’t noticed…
LikeLike
We all know the MSM would distort the figures but what irritates me is the Govt minister interviewed on TV did not have the gumption or was armed with these facts to point all this out. I keep repeating this but knowing full well the media would jump on this why wasn’t she better informed instead of agreeing ‘that some people might die as a result’. FFS has it not yet dawned on the SNP that we have a hostile media to contend with in Scotland.
IS THERE ANYONE IN GOVERNMENT CIRCLES WHO IS POLITICALLY SAVVY ENOUGH TO DEAL EFFECTIVELY WITH THE MEDIA? I ALMOST FEEL SOMETIMES THE SNP WANT TO BE REJECTED BY THE ELECTORATE AND IF THIS CONTINUES THEY SURELY WILL BE IN 2016.
Robbo.
LikeLiked by 1 person
‘IS THERE ANYONE IN GOVERNMENT CIRCLES WHO IS POLITICALLY SAVVY ENOUGH TO DEAL EFFECTIVELY WITH THE MEDIA?’
Well they have had long enough to realise, to learn, to try out different tactics in response. A mainstream media hostile to the SNP – and linked to the gaslighting of Scotland’s electorate – has been blindingly obvious for a long time.
I am wholly accepting of the fact that addressing this successfully is not trivial and probably impossible to do so fully. But then I have neither the expertise or the resources to design and implement ‘counter measures’.
Since say 2015, can anyone identify notable shifts/changes in how the SNP and/or the Scottish Government has gone about interacting with the news media? Any innovations been apparent?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Usually such exaggerated headlines are the result of a Gulhane press release, but not on this occasion https://archive.ph/cc5wA, he is just one of the 3 usual political suspects quoted alongside Baillie and ACH-him, then there is Dr Kennedy….
With so many contributory factors to contend with, variations such as this are inevitable, but will any but political agitators pay the slightest attention to the apocalyptic headlines ? I frankly doubt it…
LikeLiked by 1 person