NStQ First Nations, B.C., Canada advance to final treaty negotiations

[Pemby_mess]

Jassmine, you and some others on HBC would benefit from learning about the classic "Prisoners Dilemma" in a political context to learn why asking people how they feel, at a benefit to them, against others - Will not work.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner%27s_dilemma

absolutely no bearing on the studies in question. The poor patient outcomes are documented and confirmed by everybody administering the treatment. This isn't an advesarial zero sum.

[Livewire322]

Well I never asked you anything regarding study design. You are switching topics away from statistics to study design, a study that if done in the real world is not simple.
How would you do this study then, that would recreate the real life in person scenarios we're discussing? And how would you perform a "simple analysis" on said study.

Kind of like you picking and choosing what to discuss?

It gets a lot less flawed when you're asking people in all healthcare capacities about their experiences. If all of those subjective perspectives point to the same cause/effect, you know you're onto objective understanding.

This is not at all controversial among recently educated Canadian providers btw.

Correlation, not causation. And even Jassmine acknowledged that health science models are not as refined as in other fields.

[Pemby_mess]

This pair must get real worked up when they start seeing the BC hunting community not fighting eachother and comming together on a serious issue.

We know our aim is right over the target then boys and girls.

I will stop engaging from this point on with them I hope others realize these tactics and hold back. they want threads like this shut down

i want nothing of the sort. You should do more reading than you do typing if you're going to try and dictate other people's motivations for them.

[Pemby_mess]

Correlation, not causation. And even Jassmine acknowledged that health science models are not as refined as in other fields.[/QUOTE]

causation has been established, and it's a commonly accepted issue in the field.

[jassmine]

Kind of like you picking and choosing what to discuss?

Please enlighten me to the topics that I've been addressing of yours that I failed to discuss?

I've previously asked you to correct me if I'm misrepresenting anything:

Ok what did I misquote or take out of context that would negate the criticism of me saying that you saying the "whole model is incorrect" is akin to those who deny the science of evolution or climate change?

Yet you seem not even willing to discuss your own statements or topics anyhow:

When defending the articles that you posted you held them up as an example of “more sophisticated statistical modeling” and I’m saying that simple statistics would suffice.

What simple statistics would you use, when you don't have control groups or defined treatments and have multiple covariates and an array of different random and fixed effects?

Jassmine, it’s really not all that hard to think of a study in which doctors are given information enough to diagnose someone while keeping race out of it and then repeating the same with race known.

Well I never asked you anything regarding study design. You are switching topics away from statistics to study design, a study that if done in the real world is not simple.
How would you do this study then, that would recreate the real life in person scenarios we're discussing? And how would you perform a "simple analysis" on said study.

[Mulehahn]

I doubt many would agree the above quote defines their philosophical accretions very well. Do you think classical liberals generated those ideas out of guilt or fear?

And why aren't FN able to apply the Canadian manifestation of those same philosophies to their interests?

I think that the Classical Philosophers developed those ideas out a hope to have a better understanding of humanity. A chance given to them by the development of Society. But more to the point, yes both Hobbes and Monesquieu clearly argued that people act for nothing more than self preservation and that fear of death dominates us. This fear lead us to develop society. In so doing People surrender some rights (an extreme example is the right to kill each other in exchange for not being killed) to a central power. In the current world that is a government. However, all government are a constant state or warre and with the rise of more governments you have a equal rise in the number of warres!*

You are absolutely right, if any group,First Nations for example, feel as though this central power is no longer working, or unable to fulfill its promise they are free to leave or overthrow it. But that also extends to every other groups under that central power. Put another way, what would happen if the Central Canadian government folded or could not longer represent them fairly? I have no problem saying I fear the consequences and I am an armed, able bodied white male!

*this is a very simplified version of the great modern philosophy, but does a fair job of outlining many of the issues we will be facing. As I said in my earlier post, Society developed out of fear; but fear is a hell of a drug. In the last 90 years for them to earn the right to vote 60 years ago and the world was a much smaller place then.

[Pemby_mess]

I think that the Classical Philosophers developed those ideas out a hope to have a better understanding of humanity. A chance given to them by the development of Society. But more to the point, yes both Hobbes and Monesquieu clearly argued that people act for nothing more than self preservation and that fear of death dominates us. This fear lead us to develop society. In so doing People surrender some rights (an extreme example is the right to kill each other in exchange for not being killed) to a central power. In the current world that is a government. However, all government are a constant state or warre and with the rise of more governments you have a equal rise in the number of warres!*

You are absolutely right, if any group,First Nations for example, feel as though this central power is no longer working, or unable to fulfill its promise they are free to leave or overthrow it. But that also extends to every other groups under that central power. Put another way, what would happen if the Central Canadian government folded or could not longer represent them fairly? I have no problem saying I fear the consequences and I am an armed, able bodied white male!

*this is a very simplified version of the great modern philosophy, but does a fair job of outlining many of the issues we will be facing. As I said in my earlier post, Society developed out of fear; but fear is a hell of a drug. In the last 90 years for them to earn the right to vote 60 years ago and the world was a much smaller place then.

Ok I can see your point. Don't forget greed though, equally important as a human motivation. Anything you can do to have fear subside is positive for greed.

my question wasn't really hinting at FN dropping from the country. They were legislated off their land, dispossessed through a single, unrepresentative body of government. That was their reward for handing over their natural right to defense through violence. Liberal philosophy holds that be subject to an impartial appeal process, and thus negating the need to execute violence on their own behalf.

so here we are - they're appealing.

[Jelvis]

It was the United Nations that got this stuff going, they told Canada, you have a problem, they told the Pope he had a problem, And I saw it on the news one night,
-- U.N. told Canada they were criminal activity done while these residential/Catholic family separations were taking place by the government and church
UN decided to tell the Pope to get on his knees for his part in the system
-- If the UN had past, no one wood be talking about this, the United Nations decided to do something, and gave the feds a chance to do their part --
Jel -- United -- Nations -- has decided -- Don't Be Cruel to a heart that's true who ok --

[Livewire322]

Please enlighten me to the topics that I've been addressing of yours that I failed to discuss? I didn't say that you have been addressing topics of mine and failing to discuss them. I said the opposite, you've not been addressing all of my points i.e. picking and choosing what to discuss.

I've previously asked you to correct me if I'm misrepresenting anything: Asked and aswered. see below.

Yet you seem not even willing to discuss your own statements or topics anyhow:
Perhaps you should try not resorting to ad hominem statements that lump people in with climate change deniers and they will take you seriously.

I didn’t say that you misquoted me or took out of context what I said, did I?
I said that you, much like anti-vaxxers, tend to isolate one talking point rather than addressing all of what is said.

Jassmine, it’s really not all that hard to think of a study in which doctors are given information enough to diagnose someone while keeping race out of it and then repeating the same with race known.

I hope that that clears things up for you. Truth be told I don't care what model is used, if the paper is published in "Canadian Woman Studies" it is garbage.

It seems straight forward to me, doctors get given patient information sans picture and give diagnosis 1, they later meet the same patients and give a diagnosis without knowing that they have already done so.
If their diagnosis is different then there would be a case to be made that that individual has some bias to lose.

Considering both you and Pemby_mess have admitted that the papers were founded on patient "experience" (see below quotes). Patient experience is a completely bogus source for data because its subjective.

Correct, it is not anecdotal at all, here are specific references supporting Pemby_mess' summary:


"These narratives revealed that women’s encounters were shaped by racism, discrimination, and structural inequities that continue to marginalize and disadvantage First Nations women. The women’s health care experiences have historical, political, and economic significance and are reflective of wider postcolonial relations that shape their everyday lives."

Browne, A. J., & Fiske, J. A. (2001). First Nations women’s encounters with mainstream health care services. Western journal of nursing research, 23(2), 126-147.

"Specifically, we illustrate how the ideological process of racialization can shapethe ways that health care providers ‘read’ and interact with Aboriginal patients,and how some Aboriginal patients avoid seeking health care based on theirexpectation of being treated differently"

Tang, S. Y., & Browne, A. J. (200. ‘Race’matters: racialization and egalitarian discourses involving Aboriginal people in the Canadian health care context. Ethnicity and Health, 13(2), 109-127.

Adelson, N. (2005). The embodiment of inequity: Health disparities in Aboriginal Canada. Canadian Journal of Public Health/Revue Canadienne de Sante'e Publique, S45-S61.

Bourassa, C., McKay-McNabb, K., & Hampton, M. (2004). Racism, sexism and colonialism: The impact on the health of Aboriginal women in Canada. Canadian Woman Studies, 24(1).

A healthcare provider making judgement calls based on someone being fat, actually has a lot of utility. I haven't seen anything to suggest that fat people get less or inappropriate treatment based on their weight. I suspect you could find evidence to support the opposite. The papers I'm mentally referencing were noting stark differences in how Canadian aboriginals experienced the healthcare system in comparison with non-aboriginals. In many cases the differences were life and death.

There's now information available about racially orientated abuses within Canadian child services. To the point where it appears tthere has been widespread deliberate institutionalization of many FN children. The premise of course is that their mothers a too poor and dysfunctional to release the kids back to, not necessarily because of evidence to that affect, but simply because they are in a FN community.

[Livewire322]

It gets a lot less flawed when you're asking people in all healthcare capacities about their experiences. If all of those subjective perspectives point to the same cause/effect, you know you're onto objective understanding.

This is not at all controversial among recently educated Canadian providers btw.

You mean people that recently graduated into an environment that is hostile to people that don't follow the status quo?i.e. if you take my position and don't accept that their is a problem you are ostracized.

Correlation, not causation. And even Jassmine acknowledged that health science models are not as refined as in other fields.

causation has been established, and it's a commonly accepted issue in the field.[/QUOTE]

By whom in the field? Management? People in the public eye? Did you ever consider that these people may just be saying these things to protect their jobs because speaking out against "native rights" activists is a career limiting move?