Most Read

Jeremy Hunt was owned by Ralf Little on mental health and it’s a joy from start to finish

Jeremy Hunt ‘double dared’ Ralf Little to challenge him over the government track record on mental health care.

So the Royle Family actor did just that, taking down the so-called health secretary one glorious tweet at a time. It goes on a bit – there are 44 of them – but it’s worth every second of your time.

We think this might be our favourite bit, when he tells Hunt:

“So in actual fact you are quoting a figure to state your position and measure your successes… that NO ONE CAN CONFIRM. I don’t blame you – if no one kept a record of Oscar winners I’d be telling everyone I’ve got four.”

Mr Little, it’s over to you.

So if statistics and facts aren’t your thing and you only follow me for the silly jokes – look away now. But if you care about accountability and the NHS, read and RT this THREAD written in reply to @Jeremy_Hunt 👇👇👇

— Ralf Little (@RalfLittle) November 13, 2017

1.

(1) Firstly @Jeremy_Hunt, if you think that’s my job you seriously overestimate the responsibilities of actors. However, in response… pic.twitter.com/9ATdnAKN92

— Ralf Little (@RalfLittle) November 13, 2017

2.

(2) You said to find a European country that’s “done better” & “faster” than your quoted statistics. But firstly, are those stats legitimate?

— Ralf Little (@RalfLittle) November 13, 2017

3.

(3) .@FactCheck already proved you lied about mental health worker numbers, which you had to admit to…https://t.co/lfJb7x8dqG
mental-health

— Ralf Little (@RalfLittle) November 13, 2017

(3) REPOST with correct link…

FactCheck already proved you lied about mental health worker numbers, which you had to admit to… https://t.co/H2pqAXunoF

— Ralf Little (@RalfLittle) November 13, 2017

4.

(4) So before I start with my task at hand, let’s examine your latest stats more carefully.
“4,300 more employed by mental health trusts”

— Ralf Little (@RalfLittle) November 13, 2017

5.

(5) Impressive sounding, but “employed” is a broad term…
In terms of “employed” DOCTORS and NURSES; fact checkers https://t.co/nmpgO1D2fa disagree: we in fact have much FEWER of them, as described here…https://t.co/u4BNEtgvrJ

— Ralf Little (@RalfLittle) November 13, 2017

6.

(6) Also according to https://t.co/L9LHiYfJm0 we have 14% fewer mental health nurses than we did in 2010.
In real terms this amounts to 6000. Six. Thousand. FEWER. Nurses.

— Ralf Little (@RalfLittle) November 13, 2017

7.

(7) Psychiatry doctor numbers have remained almost flat, in fact falling slightly:
We now have 170 FEWER fully trained doctors now vs 2010.

— Ralf Little (@RalfLittle) November 13, 2017

8.

(8) The future doesn’t look great either – training for new psychiatry specialists fell to only 69% of places filled this year after two rounds https://t.co/VJpUrOhhdn

— Ralf Little (@RalfLittle) November 13, 2017

9.

(9) If these are just boring stats for you (and anyone else reading) let me summarise…

The mental health workforce in England is around 210,000 staff…

— Ralf Little (@RalfLittle) November 13, 2017

10.

(10) Therefore an additional 4300 more “employees”, (not necessarily doctors or nurses), is JUST a 2% increase over 7 years. Meanwhile the WORKLOAD INCREASED by 28%.

In real terms, almost a crisis. It certainly looks nothing like this manifesto pledge. https://t.co/ykFYzCxZK0

— Ralf Little (@RalfLittle) November 13, 2017

11.

(11) Now I appreciate this is a difficult problem to overcome, but it’s your job. Firing out misleading stats on Andrew #Marr and Twitter helps no one, except perhaps you.

— Ralf Little (@RalfLittle) November 13, 2017

12.

(12) Next up…

“1400 more treated every day since 2010.”

I assume you got that from this NHS Digital graph…https://t.co/6VxKZHDe7q

— Ralf Little (@RalfLittle) November 13, 2017

13.

(13) Seems ok at 1st glance, but unfortunately for you, https://t.co/p1A9bhLIgi have stated this figure is UNVERIFIABLE as they have changed the methods of measuring mental health user statistics over the time period.

— Ralf Little (@RalfLittle) November 13, 2017

14.

(14) In addition, this figure was then confirmed UNVERIFIABLE by NHS Digital, the very people who created the graph in the first place! https://t.co/eJqUrBPseE

— Ralf Little (@RalfLittle) November 13, 2017

15.

(15) So in actual fact you are quoting a figure to state your position and measure your successes… that NO ONE CAN CONFIRM.

— Ralf Little (@RalfLittle) November 13, 2017

16.

(16) I don’t blame you – if no one kept a record of Oscar winners I’d be telling everyone I’ve got four. #quadrupleOscarwinner#Boom

— Ralf Little (@RalfLittle) November 13, 2017

17.

(17) There’s another problem with this claim of yours. To get technical, quoting this as people “treated” is also misleading, as what the graph specifically shows is number of people “IN CONTACT WITH” a doctor.

— Ralf Little (@RalfLittle) November 13, 2017

18.

(18) In the REAL world, outside of graphs and stats, that’s an important distinction that someone in your position really should be aware of.

— Ralf Little (@RalfLittle) November 13, 2017

19.

(19) It could be the difference between seeing a doctor for an initial consultation (“in contact with”) and actually prescribed a treatment plan with medication/follow up/therapy (“treated”)

— Ralf Little (@RalfLittle) November 13, 2017

20.

(20) In terms of patient experience and care, that’s a HUGE difference.

To reword this statistic from “in contact with” to “treated” is horribly inaccurate, misleading, and simply NOT THE REAL TRUTH.

— Ralf Little (@RalfLittle) November 13, 2017

21.

(21) So… Either you know it’s a lie and you said it anyway, or you were genuinely unaware of the distinction.

Instead of name calling, I’ll choose to believe you were unaware and said it in good faith.

— Ralf Little (@RalfLittle) November 13, 2017

Article Pages:12

Let's

Original Article

Related Posts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *