Sometimes you couldn’t make it up …
It is a fact that inevitably, from time to time, stories appear in the media that seem – to the proverbial ordinary man or woman on the Clapham omnibus who can claim to possess a modicum of plain, old-fashioned, common sense (as we all can) – defy logic and/or fly in the face of every notion of how the world does, or should, work.
Each individual can chose their favourites from the endless selection of “incoming”.
At the risk of inviting of inviting controversy and derision – and even suffering the alleged indignity of being “culture cancelled” – I am content to admit that one of my own is the absurd “woke” directive that anyone can demand to be treated as any particular gender (or genders) simply by their personal choice of the moment.
I hold to the view that biologically this is neither possible nor helpful to the world at large in a context where women these days are acutely concerned about privacy, health and “safe spaces”.
Nevertheless, a few days ago a story emerged about a new research study which has demonstrated that – as a matter of fact – it is the case that statistically female patients underdoing surgical medical procedures have better outcomes if they are operated upon by female surgeons rather than male ones.
It sounds illogical and unlikely – but there it is.
Accordingly to my researches this morning, nobody is quite sure who originally came up with the adage that “there are lies, damned lies … and statistics” but it is one that often resonates.
From personal experience – I was once accused of a pattern of quasi-fraudulent behaviour based upon a supposed piece of statistical analysis – I know that the gathering of (and drawing conclusion from) statistics is a complex and difficult exercise to get right.
In the incident in question, a statistical expert, who subsequently reviewed the data and conclusions of said study, gave his verdict that both were fundamentally unsound in several respects, chief amongst them being that (1) before starting, the compiler of the statistical study had clearly decided what he/she wanted the outcome to be and then (2) had sought out “statistics” that tended to support it.
In short, the statistic had neither been gathered dispassionately nor “correctly”. The principle is that you collect your statistics first – and only then assess them in order to see what they say.
But I digress.
My purpose today is to provide Rusters with a link to an article by Jo Macfarlane and Pat Hagen upon one lady’s experience of “female patients fare appreciably better being operated upon by female surgeons” (or rather the opposite!) – see here, as appears today upon the website of the – DAILY MAIL
