Let’s look on the bright side. The people voted this way (quite significantly) so they must be seeing something positive there. I already know all the downsides so let’s discuss the upsides.

    • Rangelus@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Racial background been a factor in health decisions for ages in certain situations. Just like age, weight, sex and smoking are. To be clear we are talking about situations where all else is equal between patients, then racial background based risk factors are included to decide who gets surgery first.

      I absolute believe clinically significant factors should be a part of health decisions, regardless of what they are.

      • JasSmith
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Ethnicity has only ever been used as a data point for the best health outcomes. Some diseases progress differently in different ethnicities. It has never been used to prioritise healthcare in NZ. The former is fine. The latter is an actual war crime.

        Either way, an argument of “it’s not new” isn’t a defence of systemic racial discrimination for healthcare.

    • Ilovethebomb@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Shut down by the facts yet again. You’re having a bit of a time on here lately, aren’t you?

      • Rangelus@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Nope. That article is an appallingly biased take on a complex issue, which does not explain the situation at all.

        There is a clinical benefit for considering racial background in health decisions. That is all.