UK Politics: Not even a Penny for a new Prime Minister

[Heartofice]

1 minute ago, DMC said:

The relative percentages should of course be relevant.

Why?

[karaddin]

4 minutes ago, TrackerNeil said:

I'm not at all sure ths is the case in terms of receiving PBs, not at least from what I am reading. But that's not an issue related to the Cass report and I don't want to start thread drift.

It's literally summarizing one of the bits of the report you quoted. The quoted bits here are treating it [PB] like it's solely a cooling off period that gives people time to think, and most of them subsequently undergo treatment. I cannot fathom how that's an argument that people shouldn't even get to the stage of PBs - if anything it would support skipping them.

If most people decided not to proceed with treatment after PB then that would certainly be an argument for not rushing treatment, although it still wouldn't demonstrate that the process isn't working.

[TrackerNeil]

3 minutes ago, karaddin said:

It's literally summarizing one of the bits of the report you quoted.

I'm sorry; I thought you meant a cooling-off period before taking PBs. I'll go back and edit that post accordingly, and leave this note here to document that I did so.

[Heartofice]

10 minutes ago, karaddin said:

If most people decided not to proceed with treatment after PB then that would certainly be an argument for not rushing treatment, although it still wouldn't demonstrate that the process isn't working.

This would only be relevant if you ignore all of the context which I laid out on the last page. 

[DMC]

13 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

Why?

To have a full understanding of the increase.  For instance, let’s say the denominator is a million - and again I have no idea and am just trying to understand the context.  If that was the case, 250 to 5000 is a change from .025 percent to .5 percent.  People are going to interpret that a lot differently than if it’s out of 100 thousand, wherein the difference would be .25 percent to five percent.  And that’s not even accounting for possible differences/increases of the overall population over time.

[Heartofice]

Just now, DMC said:

To have a full understanding of the increase.  For instance, let’s say the denominator is a million - and again I have no idea and am just trying to understand the context.  If that was the case, 250 to 5000 is a change from .025 percent to .5 percent.  People are going to interpret that a lot differently than if it’s out of 100 thousand, wherein the difference would be .25 percent to five percent.  And that’s not even accounting for possible differences/increases of the overall population over time.

All you need to do is look at the number of referrals over the previous years and compare. The relevance is that the number was relatively consistent prior to 2009, then started rising, then shot right up from 2014. The relevant question is to why that number increased so massively in such a short space of time. There isn't a question as to whether it shot up or not. It certainly isn't explained by an exponential growth in population. 

[DMC]

1 minute ago, Heartofice said:

All you need to do is look at the number of referrals over the previous years and compare.

No, that’s not all you need to do.  Or at least it’s not all I need to do.  Funny thing is, I’m inclined to agree with you about at least some of the reasons for such an increase.  But your apparent hostility to me asking a basic question on the figures you’re using doesn’t endear one’s self.

[Heartofice]

1 minute ago, DMC said:

No, that’s not all you need to do.  Or at least it’s not all I need to do.  Funny thing is, I’m inclined to agree with you about at least some of the reasons for such an increase.  But your apparent hostility to me asking a basic question on the figures you’re using doesn’t endear one’s self.

Well we are hardly likely to ever really endear ourselves to each other are we? 

Maybe if you explained the reasoning for the question I might have given you a fairer shake. I still don't see how the overall population has any real relevance to the conversation. So I can take it either 2 ways:
 

1. You are suggesting that the increase is inline with the overall population increase and so is not notable. Again this seems highly unlikely given the exponential rise in referrals doesn't reflect the increase in the UK population at all. Also a relevant point to the UK is that the majority of any population increase over the past few years is down to large scale immigration, not birth rates, which are dropping.
    
2. Or you want to paint a picture of the numbers being 'no big deal'. Now that was my initial impression of where you were heading here, mainly because there has been a very dismissive attitude to this medical scandal from others on this board, and I wouldn't be surprised if someone turned around and said 'meh it's just 5000 kids, doesn't matter'
   
    

[DMC]

1 minute ago, Heartofice said:

So I can take it either 2 ways:

Perhaps instead of making broad assumptions take me at my word that I just want to understand the scale of the increase - as I’ve stated repeatedly?  Because I honestly have no idea, and if you do, it’d be basic common courtesy to, ya know, just tell me.

[Heartofice]

1 minute ago, DMC said:

Perhaps instead of making broad assumptions take me at my word that I just want to understand the scale of the increase - as I’ve stated repeatedly?  Because I honestly have no idea, and if you do, it’d be basic common courtesy to, ya know, just tell me.

Well I asked you why. Again, i still don't see it is as in anyway a relevant question to ask, so it makes sense I would want to know the context for your question. Anyway, let's move on. The point is that the scale of change is the key one to pay attention to and Cass says its unexplained but cannot be explained by increases in acceptance of trans identity.

[DMC]

Just now, Heartofice said:

Well I asked you why. Again, i still don't see it is as in anyway a relevant question to ask, so it makes sense I would want to know the context for your question. Anyway, let's move on.

So..you either don’t know or are unwilling to tell me for some weird ass reason.  Hohkay, yeah, let’s move on.

[Heartofice]

4 minutes ago, DMC said:

So..you either don’t know or are unwilling to tell me for some weird ass reason.  Hohkay, yeah, let’s move on.

Again, you can google this stuff. I don't need to waste my time hunting around to answer to a question I don't think is relevant and to someone who won't even tell me why they are asking it. But yeah.... let's move on!

Edited April 12 by Heartofice

[karaddin]

1 hour ago, DMC said:

I’m curious, what is the overall population?  As in, how many children/adolescents does NHS regularly see each year - or in other words, 250 or 5,000 out of how many?  I checked the link to try to find out myself but on a quick glance I couldn’t find anything.

There were just over 600k births in the UK in 2022, down from over 700k in 2020 (so dropping quite substantially). As for NHS visits

Quote

Over 420,000 children and young people were treated through NHS-commissioned community services in 2020/21. This is approximately 39.6% of children and young people with a diagnosable mental health condition, exceeding the target of 35% (based on the 2004 prevalence estimates that applied when the target was set). 

From https://www.england.nhs.uk/mental-health/cyp/

[Heartofice]

The population thing is a dead end I don’t see the relevance at all.

A more interesting comparison is that not only are other countries seeing very similar rises in referrals at roughly the same time, but it aligns pretty closely to an increase in mental health problems amongst teenagers.

 

[DMC]

13 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

I don't need to waste my time hunting around to answer to a question I don't think is relevant and to someone who won't even tell me why they are asking it.

I literally told you three times why I asked the question - as if it wasn’t obvious from my initial post.  I don’t know if this is about our previous interactions or your general disposition on this topic, but I’d advise a different tack with others if you’re trying to have a productive discussion.
 

And yeah, I did try to google but initially got results that weren’t informative.  It’s kind of a weird search parameter I’m not used to making.  Figured I’d just get a quicker answer here.  Little did I know…

10 minutes ago, karaddin said:

As for NHS visits

Thanks.  Hope providing that information was not preceded by a labyrinthine calculus in your head.

[karaddin]

3 minutes ago, DMC said:

Thanks.  Hope providing that information was not preceded by a labyrinthine calculus in your head.

I found it easier than expected. Not sure if I accidentally performed a dark ritual first.

[Heartofice]

6 minutes ago, DMC said:

I literally told you three times why I asked the question - as if it wasn’t obvious from my initial post.  I don’t know if this is about our previous interactions or your general disposition on this topic, but I’d advise a different tack with others if you’re trying to have a productive discussion.

Well if you are trying to suggest that the increase is due to a relative increase in population I can tell you are WAY off and should probably consider other factors first. 

[DMC]

Just now, Heartofice said:

Well if you are trying to suggest that the increase is due to a relative increase in population I can tell you are WAY off and should probably consider other factors first. 

I wasn’t, at all.  I mentioned population increases just to note it’s going to affect the relative percentages over time.  Obviously, a 16 times increase is not going to solely be accounted for by population increases unless, like, the NHS drastically changed their admissions criteria.

Anyway, please stop projecting arguments I’m making simply due to me asking you for basic data.

[Heartofice]

3 minutes ago, DMC said:

I wasn’t, at all.  I mentioned population increases just to note it’s going to affect the relative percentages over time.  Obviously, a 16 times increase is not going to solely be accounted for by population increases unless, like, the NHS drastically changed their admissions criteria.

Anyway, please stop projecting arguments I’m making simply due to me asking you for basic data.

Well the data I gave was pretty clear. 250 cases a year rising to 5000 cases a year within a decade. What more do you need to know. 

[DMC]

4 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

What more do you need to know. 

Um, what I asked, which kar provided.