Telehealth Gloves are Off Again

2 min read April 5, 2013 at 2:06pm on Computing, NBN and Rant

Hat tip to Geordie Guy for alerting me to Nick Ross' latest foray into Telehealth.  I hadn't heard it myself, of course, because Nick has blocked me on Twitter following my last rant

In the fallout from said rant, I also contributed to a discussion on Whirlpool about Nick's massive article. Another good article in the interim on the NBN and telehealth is the article by Kath Crosby (twitter) on Ausvotes2013.

Nick's comment on my last post implies that he's interacted with me regarding my concerns, and he said as much again in the whirlpool thread.  I posted a rebuttal of this, as well as a reply to the people in that thread who felt my mind was closed to Nick's truth (fair acknowledgement to Nick for saying he wants to change my mind with facts - about bloody time!)  but the mods considered it off-topic, so here it is again.

Nick has not interacted with me in any significant way following any of my posts.  Specifically, he has not cited any new evidence at all apart from the articles he linked to in his telehealth articles (all of which I have linked to from this blog).

I made the point that Nick's crowdsourcing of articles from whirlpool has already turned up a larger number of better-quality articles than Nick had posted on ABC T&G to date... which makes me rather wonder what actual evidence he was basing his previous assertions on.

And finally, I'll be delighted if his request turns up enough good quality articles to support his opinions.  If it does, then I promise I'll be the first to change my tune.

I would, however, still really like Nick (or someone else of his choosing) to address the same questions that I've repeatedly asked here (and elsewhere).

And finally, I've trawled twitter and my gmail and have screencaps that show Nick's entire interaction with me on this issue;  which consists of him repeating his opinions and what is clearly the best justification in the history of rhetoric - "I don't write things which can be proven wrong".

Well.  Glad that's settled then.