31 Oct 2008
Thanks to “utterdrivel” over on the NOTBBC forums. This is a photo he/she took of the new Revels packet.
"A beer and some convo"
Thanks to “utterdrivel” over on the NOTBBC forums. This is a photo he/she took of the new Revels packet.
Our work has a classified advert service where staff can sell stuff.
There’s one up at the mo selling:
“International mediumship, tarot readings, angel cards, palmestry, past present and future readings. 30 years experience.”
I had a look at the TaC’s of the service and apparently all ads should be
“legal, decent, honest and truthful.”
I wonder if I can get the thing pulled because of breaching the rules?
At the risk of boring the pants of you any more I just must witter briefly about the major news story of the week.
It seems that 2 idiots on the radio said some stupid things on their radio show.
And this is the single biggest news item of the week.
First off, they’re idiots.
Second off, there should be no second part.
That should have been it. 2 people complained on the night. The presenters apologised to the “victim” and the guy sweetly has accepted the apology and wants the story to go away.
But no it isn’t going away. And why?
Apparently people are offended. People who would never in their lives listen to one of these radio shows. Ever.
I think the only proper offended people are the recipient of the message and his granddaughter (who incidentally seems to be rather easily offendable for a goth porn model).
So why all the hooha?
Is it real offence on the part of the media? Err no.
Is it grandstanding to try and demonstrate who’s most moral? No.
What it seems like now is yet another bandwagon jumping onto something that takes the mind off the shitter news that seems to be doing the rounds re recession etc… But I’m not even sure that’s what has led the media flurry of ludicrous over-reaction.
What concerns me is that the anti-beeb forces have got a nice new stick to beat the BBC with. There is a sizeable bunch of idiots people who seem to think that the BBC would be better if it had to have adverts, telly shows as crappy as ITVs and radio of the quality of local independent stations. For these people the licence fee is just another tax (technically it is I suppose). The fact of a tax over-rides any thought that there’s one hell of a benefit to having the BBC as it is. Namely that it’s a shed load better than any other broadcaster.
BBC4 is astonishingly good at times. 3 can be flushed away but 1 and 2 remain as good as ever. And radio 4 is untouchable re intelligent programming.
For some people the thought that they have to pay all the time means that they should be able to watch or listen to any programme and a: not be offended by it; and b: enjoy it.
So many things are wrong with that attitude. By that measure I want to see horror fillums and drama that shows the reality of life with kids TV involving swearing, underage sex, drugs and mindless violence. It offends me that we have to sanitise what goes out over the airwaves. Where’s my rebate and stick to whack the DG with?
Do these people seriously think that a non-public BBC will offend less? I think Channel 4 gives the lie to that idea. So what do they do next? Censorship? Yet more restrictions in the guise of “protecting the public”?
For the record I think that’s rubbish. The real point is this:
The tories had a spokesman on the radio yesterday insisting with a straight face that the DG should resign over this.
This concerns me as the tories have always had a faction that wants to get the BBC privatised. You’d think that the fact that every other privatisation has failed spectacularly (apart from maybe BT) doesn’t seem to deter them.
They’ll likely make the next government too. So are the days of a decent BBC on the wane? Let’s hope not.
And just to repeat. Brand and Ross are dicks but this reaction is ridiculous. There is actual news happening in the world. Can we hear about that instead please?
I decided to stick some pics on Flickr. No particular reason except thinking I should have a “best of” album comprising the pics I think are my best.
So here they are.
This is only any good at all because I know someone called Tamali.
Sometimes something happens that makes you cringe and look away and not want to know what happens next.
This has happened this week over on rec.j.
Someone advertised some juggly kit online shop. And didn’t they do well.
From what I saw the comments so far have included such minor criticisms as “well done for alienating most of your potential customers”, “why the ridiculous restriction in colours?”, “the site looks dreadful on most browsers”, “the site is unfinished to the extent of not having anything behind most of the links” and ”what you do actually have for sale looks rubbish”.
The guy seems to have responded to these criticisms but, like at a car crash, I can’t bring myself to look. [edit: oops looks like I was wrong here. Still not looking tho. Really not.]
I shall avoid the thread.
Well doesn’t the NHS seem to be in the news this week?
Another story on the beeb about how bad hospital canteens are.
So canteens are rubbish and have no healthy food.
About 6 years ago (so I have no clue if this criticism is still true, but I would expect so) I used to work at Glenfield Hospital in Leicester which for those who don’t know is a cardiac speciality unit. In other words people come from all over the country (in some cases) to get top heart work done.
As a group, us physios used to go to the canteen on our Fridays for lunch. Every week we used to fill in one of their feedback forms with comments along the lines of
“This is a cardiac health centre – why is sausage and chips £1 but a salad big enough for half a person £2?”
The canteen never even condescended to give us a reply. We must have sent over 50 of them in.
OK so I’m incontinent today but:
Coo there’s your actual news story about us physios on the BBC. It’s about the idea that people should be able to self-refer to physios rather than taking time up going to see the GP first.
This has been taken in some strange ways on their HYS about the topic.
First off people seem to think that it means that people can just phone in and get a physio appt. This isn’t what self-referral is. When a GP refers us a patient s/he has to fill in a referral form with lots of questions on. This then gets looked at by me (usually) and then I decide whether it gets accepted or not (and if not, why not and a letter written back to the GP), and then whether the patient needs to be seen urgently or whether they can be left on the waiting list for a while. All self-referral means is that the patient will fill a form in to start the process rather than the GP filling it in.
Then there are comments like:
In theory, this sounds like a fantastic idea.
In practice, I fear that physios will be over-burdened with hypercondriacs and time-wasters, something that is becoming more common in recent times.
For example, Mrs A is recovering from a car accident and needs a physio appointment, but the physio cannot see her because she is busy with Mrs B who is just overweight, lazy, and looking for attention or a sick note.
Unfortunately this is what happens anyway. The person who refers is irrelevant. Yes we’ll get more people into the system at first but we won’t be letting regular malingerers in on a regular basis (and yes we do know when you are malingering). I refer you back to the bit about me writing back re why we’re not accepting a referral.
Then the worry seems to be:
This pre-supposes A) The referring individual knows what’s wrong with them, and B) That they know physio will be of benefit to them.
This also means that the physio will have to be able to effectively screen out those who need to see a doctor.
Given the above, I’d be prepared for a lot more mis-diagnosis, complications from inappropriate treatment, and a few people dropping dead as their back pain turns out to be something altogether far more worrying indeed!
I am aware of someone who went to his GP and asked to be referred to a physio for back problems etc. The doctor was not happy and referred the person to hospital. The back problem was caused by pressure from a tumour!
Paragraph 1 is pure rubbish. Part A: so people need to know what’s wrong with them before they see a GP? And part B: Why? Surely finding out that physio is not helpful just leads to further investigation. This is what happens now.
Paragraph 2: Erm. Ok I can do condescending (as DB once said, “I know I’ve read your blog”) but that is appalling. What does this guy think we’re trained in? No doubt he’s a “give me some massage” type. Assessments routinely ask “red flag” questions – IE looking for stuff that needs urgent follow-up. We know what musculo-skeletal patterns are there. We know the commonest symptoms and patterns of non-MSK origin. That’s why we spend 3 years or more at uni then years of on-going training on the job.
So paragraph 3 is rather redundant. I’d pick a physio to spot nasty back symptoms in a 45 minute assessment over a rushed non-specialist GP in an 8 minute assessment any day of the week.
The second one is again just what we do day in day out. I’ve spotted tumours, MS, cancer and so on in patients who have been “screened” by GPs. It’s one of the things we’ve been trained for.
And then there’s the political argumentative types:
I wish these imbeciles would stop meddling with the system, they havent got a clue what they are doing as has been found with the contracts and out of hours care….
Let the reshaping suggestions come the other way……far to much meddling from the top is costing us Billions in waste…..
You mean like the large number of studies done re self-referral that show it’s worked well, is cheaper, quicker and less wasteful than GP controlled care? Yeah really top down that stuff.
Oh and the lunatics:
GPs should always be the gate keeper but would benefit from more pain management training and a wider choice of therapies to offer such as massage.
The physio also needs to be given the power to refer someone back to their GP if they feel that they should.
So massage is useful (quote from the European Back Pain guidelines “We cannot recommend massage therapy as a treatment for chronic low back pain.” NB this is written by an international committee looking at vast amounts of published and reviewed literature – not merely some bureaucratic nonsense) and someone thinks that physios should be able to refer back to GPs. Like they can’t now? Again it’s what I do multiple times daily should I need to.
But one of the comments made me smile:
Given that most visits to a physio make a trip to a medieval torture chamber seem like a gentle day out, the more malingerers that get folded and half and have their big toes poked up the noses, the better.
However, telling folk to exercise more isn’t the answer to stop physio referrals as it’ll just increase sports injuries cause by lack of warm ups/downs and good posture.
Telly has been interesting recently. More specifically BBC4 has been.
They’ve had a few interesting shows on lately; the best being “The Story of Maths”. Great history programme even if you’re not a mathmetician.
Anyway they’ve got a game show. It’s unbelievable but ’tis true.
It goes by the name “Only Connect” and is utterly riveting for all the wrong reasons.
The main thing is that it’s somewhat (read “spectacularly”) up its own fundament.
Example 1: The name of the thing comes from the epigraph to EM Forster’s 1910 novel Howards End.
Example 2: Each game has a board from which the teams pick a tile. In most shows this board would be numbered. So that the team may ask for question 1 or 5 or whatever. In this game the tiles are all given greek letters. “We’ll try epsilon please”. Ugh.
Example 3: On failing to get the next number in the following list “23, 57, 1113,____” the team said “OMG we iz so dummzazzez”(or words to that effect) when being told the answer was “1719″ because “it’s all about prime numbers ain’t it”. And they meant it.
Victoria Coren hosts, I’m sure only for the cash, although she did also do “Balderdash and Piffle” the amazing self-criticizing game show.
But despite all its shortcomings it is actually a game show where you have to think. It’s not purely about knowing random stuff but using what you know and being made to think about context as well as pure recall.
Beeb 4 had a Have Your Say page and there are some magic missives:
“Fabulous. Really enjoying Only Connect. An intelligent, engaging and actually difficult game show.”
“I found this programme stimulating. Intelligent, challenging questions and Victoria Coren’s presentation is just right. It does not need audience or gimmicks; we have enough of this type of quiz show. It stands well on its own. Ignore the negative comments, this is good television.”
“Diamond amidst dross. One of very few quiz shows that does not dumb down. Only Connect and Victoria Coren palliate the pain of the ever-increasing TV License.” (this one is improved immeasurably by the knowledge that the writer is one “Hercules van Tonder”)
But there are some naysayers too:
“I turned over thinking this was a joke show – but it’s on again this week. Amazing. Why has Ms Coren risked her promising career for this drivel? It’s not as clever as it would like to think it is, as even the contestants couldn’t get the correct answers. One for the turkey drawer, me thinks.”
“Having seen the first episode, I have to express my incredulity that there will be a second. Pretentious subject matter delivered in an antiseptic package, rounded off by Victoria Coren fighting a losing battle with the autocue. Put this in the drawer with Eldorado and Brighton Belles.”
“That was scarily like the fictitious, and awful, Numberwang invented by Mitchell and Webb. Was it supposed to be funny?”
I like a good debate.