Daily review 08/12/2022

Written By: - Date published: 5:30 pm, December 8th, 2022 - 46 comments
Categories: Daily review - Tags:

Daily review is also your post.

This provides Standardistas the opportunity to review events of the day.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Don’t forget to be kind to each other …

46 comments on “Daily review 08/12/2022 ”

  • Comments are now closed

    • Mac1 1.1
      8 December 2022 at 8:29 pm

      You mean, instead of learning to play slide guitar and the blues, DADGAD and teaching hundreds of kids to play, I could have been a billionaire?

      Well, billionaires might journey to experience weightlessness, but a poor blind black bluesman is on the way to the stars.

      I know who I'd rather be……..

  2. dvT 2
    8 December 2022 at 6:25 pm

    GEEZ boot camps

    The basic assumption is that the kid will think

    Oh I don't want to do that ram raid so I won't.

    These kids just don't think that far ahead

    AND mayor Brown wants to save money on child care centers
    GEEZ
    https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/300760303/call-for-time-out-as-auckland-mayor-proposes-scrapping-childcare-centres

  3. Sacha 3
    8 December 2022 at 7:09 pm

    A great 7-minute routine about how mass and social media manufacture outrage every day. Really well conveyed, including animation.

    • ianmac 3.1
      8 December 2022 at 7:21 pm

      Yeah Sacha. So typical here too. Sickening.

    • Anker 3.2
      8 December 2022 at 9:37 pm

      Oh yes this has already been discussed on Open Mike earlier today. But nice try Sacha and Ianmac . Lol

      • Sacha 3.2.1
        9 December 2022 at 9:41 am

        Nice try at what? And I have nothing to do with Ian’s reply.

        • Anker 3.2.1.1
          9 December 2022 at 1:21 pm

          My apologies Sacha, probably a little unfair on my behalf. It might make some sense to you if you read the thread with DB Brown Open Mike the 08/12.

          But hope you accept my apologies anyway

  4. Belladonna 4
    8 December 2022 at 7:11 pm

    This just makes me really uncomfortable.

    Gardner-Hopkins fought his suspension right the way through the Tribunal process – and IIRC only admitted his offending when he was forced to (in an attempt to bargain down the sentence with a show of remorse) [NB: that's my opinion]

    He's still within the suspension period (3 years) – and I just think it's really tone-deaf for the Ngāti Paoa Trust Board to nominate him (as the sole choice) to sit on a resource consent hearing panel.

    When his offending came from a position of power – as a senior figure in the law firm abusing young interns – I really don't think it's appropriate for him to be placed in a position of authority again, at this time.

    The response from the Iwi representative, doesn't fill me with confidence that they perceive him as having done anything wrong, or that they are prepared to adequately supervise him in this role.

    Asked why Gardner-Hopkins was chosen, Roebuck replied, “why not?”

    “If you have done your time … it has nothing to do with this thing.”

    Gardner-Hopkins was the only and best possible nominee for the iwi to put forward and had represented it before. His appointment was not as a lawyer, Roebuck said.

    “I don’t have any opinion on his past indiscretion.”

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/wellington/130664232/metoo-lawyers-fight-to-represent-iwi-heads-to-high-court

  6. Incognito 6
    8 December 2022 at 9:14 pm

    Don’t read the following if you’re anti-statin and/or believe in Big Pharma conspiracies.

    https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/lifestyle/2022/12/statins-lower-the-risk-of-one-of-the-deadliest-types-of-strokes-study-finds.html

    • weka 6.1
      8 December 2022 at 10:50 pm

      the conversation wasn't that statins don't work, it was about them being overprescribed.

      • RedLogix 6.1.1
        8 December 2022 at 10:59 pm

        The problem I have is that the medical industry seems to have a commercial interest in telling us that statins are the only thing that works.

        • Shanreagh 6.1.1.1
          9 December 2022 at 12:46 am

          Unless you have high cholesterol/CVD that is not able to be treated by other means why is publicity about statins of concern?

          Surely it is something you would discuss with your Dr.

          • Andy 6.1.1.1.1
            9 December 2022 at 9:32 am

            The doctors I know are usually pretty happy to put you on statins, hypertension medicine etc without looking at the underlying causes.

            For me, after giving up alcohol, refined sugar (mostly) and losing over 10kg weight and watching my diet and sleep, I have managed to wean myself off all meds after 10 years on them

            • Incognito 6.1.1.1.1.1
              9 December 2022 at 10:03 am

              I’d suggest that your assumptions about doctors prescribing statins is somewhat inaccurate or that you need better doctors.

              IMHO, people ought to take more responsibility for their health and wellbeing rather than ignorantly criticising trained professional health workers and blaming or their ills on others and/or inadequate drugs & treatments.

              • Andy …
                9 December 2022 at 10:21 am

                Can we get this clear? I have just stated that I am taking control of my own health. Are you referring to me as ignorant? It's hard to read the room here,

                I would have expected a little gratitude for me taking some pressure off public resources

                I do need better doctors, yes, but many of them were sacked during you know what, so I am left with the "consensus" who just follow the pharma narrative.

                I've had doctors personally speak to me about this

                • Incognito …
                  9 December 2022 at 12:18 pm

                  Look, first you insinuated that those doctors are careless and bordering on professionally negligent by prescribing statins without looking at underlying causes. Next, you claim special hero status for looking after yourself and taking responsibility for your health and wellbeing – you deserve a medal for that!

                  If your doctors were sacked then I’d repeat my earlier suggestion that you need to see better doctors.

                  It is lovely to hear that doctors spoke to you about that (??) but not about the underlying causes of your condition that justified prescribing statins to you.

              • RedLogix …
                9 December 2022 at 10:45 am

                As with almost anything medical you can find studies and papers both supporting and challenging almost any treatment. Statins are no exception.

                The real problem for GPs is their business model. A 10 – 15 minute appointment, a short conversation, maybe a BP check, and maybe some blood tests or a referral to a specialist. Nowhere near time enough to understand, much less work with the whole patient.

                And unlike Andy, most people are not going to stop the alcohol, sugar, refined carbs, and manage their sleep and stress better. So a prescription for some pills becomes the default expectation and setting.

                I have no problem with my GP, he is a good guy and has been helpful to the degree he can be. But for results I work with a Functional Medicine specialist. A better doctor if you will.

                Incidentally if weka reads this – I realised the other day that the first place I saw the term 'Functional Medicine' was in a comment you made maybe a year or so ago. That planted the seed in my mind and I followed it from there. Credit where it is due.

                • Shanreagh …
                  9 December 2022 at 11:05 am

                  So are functional medicine specialists medical specialists (MBChB) with an extra specialty added? The link you had seemed to ally them with people who look at diet, exercise etc rather than the GP specialty.

                  My GP has two subspecialties – sports medicine and obstetrics – or are they alternate medicine practitioners like osteopaths? My GP refers on to people such as dieticians etc as well as to the hospital specialists and to specialists privately.

                  People are helped by many different people for their health and I am glad that you have found a person that helps you.

                  • Shanreagh …
                    9 December 2022 at 11:43 am

                    Just to add some more, as it has pelting down with rain just as I want to leave to do outside messages.

                    In my health conditions I have come across several health professionals (GPs) who say 'yep exercise and diet change and you won't need pharmaceutical input' Both good exercise and good food/diet/fodmapping are key parts of managing the risk of getting CVD and dealing with high cholesterol they are not the whole picture. The whole picture needs all of these plus pharma support and perhaps particular Vit B supplements. Perhaps counselling to deal with stress if that is part of the equation.

                    So having them all working with me and with each other has been ideal for me. They all feedback to my GP.

                    Hope your health journey is successful.

                  • weka …
                    9 December 2022 at 11:44 am

                    Functional medicine sits between alternative health and mainstream medicine. FM practitioners aren't medical doctors (although medical doctors can be FM practitioners). They are more science based than alt health, but they also extrapolate a fair bit rather than waiting for more definitive evidence.

                    They can be cutting edge, ahead of mainstream medicine, and they can also be dodgy. They're heavy on nutritional status (and thus supplementation).

                    I was thinking about the cutting edge stuff when I listened to this excellent interview on Saturday Morning recently.

                    https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/saturday/audio/2018868695/dr-matthew-phillips-could-fasting-and-keto-heal-brains

                    Matthew Phillips is a neurologist and researcher whose focus is on ketogenic diets. He's doing mainstream research in an area that is not mainstream. The interview is worth listening to because he's socially intelligent as well as knowledgeable on the issues involved, but the point I want to make here is that alternative health (including functional medicine) has been experimenting with ketogenic and low carb diets for a long time. This includes people who have reversed their Type 2 diabetes for instance. many people use it for managing heart disease and other syndrome X conditions.

                    When I say experimenting, I mean they go and try it out and see if it works. For some people it really doesn't, others it does. The research in mainstream medicine follows the counter culture.

                    The problem here is that it's such a waste of time because mainstream medicine is just bad at picking up and exploring the cutting edge, emerging modalities. We could instead have a society that takes the best of both mainstream medicine and alt health and delivers holistic care.

                    The belief system of many science is god people is the main barrier. It's a major block to developing intregrated systems that are safer than what we have now and that offer a broader range of options. By safer I mean not only that we get the research much sooner and less people experimenting, but safe in that less people have to use interventions that are well studied but have serious side effects.

                    eg less people on statins, less side effects,, less cascading medical interventions, more people on diets that give better health across the board.

                    • Shanreagh …
                      9 December 2022 at 12:01 pm

                      Sounds like I have got there through working with my open minded GP, listening/trying to all those I come into contact with for good ideas. My GP asks my beauty therapist to look for specific skin things and get back to him…..on the basis that I see her more often than I see him.

                      My condition cannot be managed without pharma support (50 years of many people, GPs included, saying oh we can do this with diet and exercise only') have proved this for me.

                      Always new things to learn.

                      I have had no side effects from statins in over 50 years. worked hard to get mine down to a medium high normal (over 5 less than 7)

                      My allergies are to pesky things like medical tape and the standard wash they use in operating theatres. I did have one years ago to dental sedation but they don't use this anymore! As an indication questions about skin type/hair colour are now routinely used by surgeons etc doing workups to trigger an enquiry about tape, washes and anaesthetics.

                    • weka []
                      9 December 2022 at 12:08 pm

                      what do you think about the people who do get side effects from statins? Especially the people who are being overmedicalised?

                      No-one is challenging individual right or preference around health care here. The political point being made is that some people’s health is harmed by overmedicalisation. Citing person positive experiences in response to that doesn’t make sense to me, it comes across as dismissive even if that’s not what you intend.

                    • Shanreagh …
                      9 December 2022 at 2:43 pm

                      @ Weka 9 December 2022 at 12:08 pm

                      Thanks for your comment.

                      So personal comments about bad things to do with statins are ok but personal comments are about good experiences are possibly 'dismissive' on my part and not part of the political point about over medicalisation.

                      Bearing in mind that the anti statins issue came about from a flip unreferenced comment from a poster that had no backing and that both Incognito and I have both put more balanced articles about the uses of statins, this approach is odd.

                      The political point I am making is that both sides of the statins case have valid points.

                      My personal views are:

                      a) for a brief moment in time Covid vaccinations replaced statins as the big 'medical' bogey du jour. Of course now that concerns about the vaccines have faded somewhat we now can let statins resume their place.

                      b) on over medicalisation is that for humans and for the future of easy and effective remedies the bigger concern above statins is the over use of antibiotics.

                      We now face a future where common illnesses are becoming more and more resistant to antibiotics. On a personal note again a family member is very allergic to penicillin. Managing illnesses, surgery both planned and unplanned without access to penicillin and penicillin based derivatives is very difficult as the substitutes are less effective. This is the future that we may all face.

                      Going to a Dr with a need for antibiotics & in the future finding that the infection is resistant to most antibiotics is much more likely to happen than possibly needing statins.

                      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4378521/

                      https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.3109/02813432.2010.487652

                      to quote from this link

                      https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.3109/03009734.2014.902879

                      'Examples of services that could no longer be delivered safely without effective antibiotics are major surgery, cancer treatment, and prophylaxis in caesarean sections, not to mention the treatment of pneumonia. Through such mechanisms, antibiotic resistance has the potential to fundamentally change the functioning of health systems as we know them.'

                      On symptoms of statins the best case is to talk to the prescriber.

                      My point is that rather than possibly needing yet another specialist some GPs are melding in functional medicine into their practices even if their shingle does not say so…..

                    • weka []
                      9 December 2022 at 7:21 pm

                      So personal comments about bad things to do with statins are ok but personal comments are about good experiences are possibly ‘dismissive’ on my part and not part of the political point about over medicalisation.

                      I wasn’t talking about people expressing personal opinions about statins (which seems to be what you are talking about there). I was referring to the difference between someone making a political point about statins, and someone else responding to that with an anecdote about personal use as if that was somehow a counter to the first point.

                      We know that statins work, in some cases very well. So it’s not a counter, it’s just a statement of the obvious. But it also diverts from the political point being made.

                      Bearing in mind that the anti statins issue came about from a flip unreferenced comment from a poster that had no backing and that both Incognito and I have both put more balanced articles about the uses of statins, this approach is odd.

                      Andy was asked to provide some evidence for his claims, which he did. I also referred to overprescribing and overmedicalisation, so if you thought his argument was too superficial you could have responded to my point. 

You didn’t put up more balanced arguments about the overprescribing/overmedicalisation issue. You’ve run lines that are basically implying that either it’s not really happening and/or it’s an issue for a patient and their doctor. This equates to saying it’s not a political issue.


                      The political point I am making is that both sides of the statins case have valid points.

                      What two sides? Either statins are being overprescribed and people are being overmedicalised, or that’s not happening.

                      a) for a brief moment in time Covid vaccinations replaced statins as the big ‘medical’ bogey du jour. Of course now that concerns about the vaccines have faded somewhat we now can let statins resume their place.

                      Again, denial that statin overuse is an issue. Statins aren’t a bogeyman, criticism of overuse is a normal response to overuse in the context of big pharma. You can’t solve that problem by leaving it to individuals to have conversations with their GP.

                      b) on over medicalisation is that for humans and for the future of easy and effective remedies the bigger concern above statins is the over use of antibiotics.

                      And? We should be concerned about antibiotic use and not statin use?

                      On symptoms of statins the best case is to talk to the prescriber.

                      In addition to that, where society allows commerce to push overmedicalisation, there is a political issue that needs wide discussion and debate.

                      My point is that rather than possibly needing yet another specialist some GPs are melding in functional medicine into their practices even if their shingle does not say so…..

                      That’s eliding two different conversations. From a political point of view, it’s problematic because while it’s true that some people can get good integrated medicine from their GPs, most can’t, and the reasons for that are political problems.

                  • RedLogix …
                    9 December 2022 at 12:42 pm

                    @Sahnreagh

                    There seems to be a wider variety of medical practices here in Australia. Here is another example that I got in touch with, but they were too booked up to take new patients.

                    But the short answer to you question is the person I am working with is a fully qualified GP who has chosen Functional Medicine for a number of reasons; some personal, some professional.

                    • Shanreagh …
                      9 December 2022 at 2:49 pm

                      Sounds good. I will see if we have a GP/Functional medicine cross over.

                      NB Shanreagh – like shantung the fabric.

                      https://www.townlands.ie/londonderry/keenaght/tamlaght-finlagan/fruithill/shanreagh/

                    • RedLogix …
                      9 December 2022 at 2:56 pm

                      Apols for the typo – spotted it too late to fix.

                    • Shanreagh …
                      10 December 2022 at 1:39 am

                      Andy was asked to provide some evidence for his claims, which he did. I also referred to overprescribing and overmedicalisation, so if you thought his argument was too superficial you could have responded to my point

                      Andy has yet to provide anything about the so-called Reagan conflict of interest issue.

                      Thanks for your points.

                      The simple point is whether statins are being over prescribed or not and if so what to do.

                      The idea that this is a 'political' point is moot. I would have classed it as a medical issue myself with more traction being exerted by raising it as a public medical issue, encouraging complaints, education. There is already being work done, and this has been done at least since the 1990s into prescribing patterns as a clinical audit issue.

                      I have found a ref to a a study done using a programme attached to the Medtech programme used by Drs. It is from 2014. It shows that 16% of the population had been prescribed a statin. There is no indication whether this is too high or not high enough.

                      https://bpac.org.nz/Report/2014/October/statins.aspx

                      A point related to this and which is definitely political is that with the new health set-up that will work on populations, it will be much easier to work out if in fact there is an over prescription issue relating to statins.

                      This is because breaking down patients by populations/sample populations can mean that Drs are able to find if their patterns are too high based on the makeup of their patient population. So patient populations of largely older/sedentary people will be expected to have higher instances of high cholesterol & possible prescribing than a younger population.

                      Part of the reason that statins are prescribed and again this is political is that lifestyle changes are hard for patients. There is resistance and this is not always the fault of the patient. The healthy food needed to maintain a good diet for minimising cholesterol is expensive. Fresh vegetables are expensive, a modicum of good quality meat is expensive, some vegetarian options are expensive.

                      Many people on low incomes use food quality and lack, to balance budgets. Lifestyle exercise changes are often easier in a group or at public facilities. These cost money.

    • Andy 6.2
      9 December 2022 at 9:26 am

      I don't believe in "big pharma conspiracies" but when corporate interests have control over testing their own products, and also have a large influence on the scientific literature, then regulatory capture and vested interests are of real concern.

      Given that this is a side effect of neo-liberalism (and of deregulation of Pharma by Reagan, as I mentioned elsewhere), I'm surprised that more on the left don't raise concerns here. It appears to me to be a failure of the neo-liberal agenda

      • Incognito 6.2.1
        9 December 2022 at 10:25 am

        You could fool me with your comments when you now claim that you don’t believe (?) in “big pharma conspiracies”. Your history of comments in this area (incl. Covid-19) suggest differently. I’d suggest that you lift your game and avoid any ambiguities as to what you’re asserting in this space. I’m sure that everything is the fault of Reagan, Thatcher, and Roger Douglas and can be traced to their decisions but this hardly helps with present day issues such as using blood from NZBS to save the life of a NZ infant.

        Stop being defensive and lift your game and I will release you from Pre-Mod, which is taking up my time.

        • Andy 6.2.1.1
          9 December 2022 at 10:36 am

          Well conspiracies do exist. "Conspiracy to pervert the course of justice" is a criminal offense.

          I can't comment on whether there was any collusion or otherwise by pharmaceutical companies in the recent times. There is ample evidence of corruption, as seen by the billions of dollars of fines against Pfizer and other companies over decades

          I used to have a reasonable trust in the medical profession and pharma. For the latter at least, that has gone, without needing to lean on fruitbat theories about 5G or nanotech.

          If seems "lifting my game" means unquestioning accepting the CV-19 response in NZ, then I'm unlikely to go there.

          I will, however, try to reference my quotes and justify my position in a rational way, and ignore the usual commenters that taunt me

          • Incognito 6.2.1.1.1
            9 December 2022 at 10:59 am

            Well conspiracies do exist.

            So does the Moon but this doesn’t mean you should bring it into the discussion unless it is pertinent. Unless you have a strong personal belief and/or an agenda. I judge your comments based on your past behaviour and record here.

            If seems “lifting my game” means unquestioning accepting the CV-19 response in NZ, then I’m unlikely to go there.

            Nope. You really do come across as absolutist and binary (i.e. B & W).

            I will, however, try to reference my quotes and justify my position in a rational way …

            Good, and I look forward to you showing this from now on.

            Get on with it!

            • Andy 6.2.1.1.1.1
              9 December 2022 at 11:21 am

              I didn't bring any conspiracies into the discussion did I ?

              I'm the one who keeps getting told that I am (a) defensive (b) a conspiracy theorist and (c) have a track record, with no evidence to back up, or any assistance on how to improve

              I guess I'm wasting my time here.

              Have a nice day

              • Incognito …
                9 December 2022 at 11:34 am

                Your resolve is weak, it appears.

                I seem to recall that you mentioned all sorts of ‘conspiracy theories’ yesterday without making it clear where you draw the line and where your own personal beliefs start & stop. This is one reason why I put you in Pre-Mod; another Mod also had an issue with your commenting here.

                TTFN

                • Andy …
                  9 December 2022 at 11:46 am

                  Oh dear the reference to "conspiracy theory" was a joking reference to a poorly written Stuff piece about "cellphones emitting radiation" which the Stuff writer claimed was a "conspiracy theory" (It's a fact the last time I checked)

                  So my general comment was a somewhat flippant remark about how terms like this are weakened by misuse, like the ill-defined term "far right"

                  I did back up my comment by later quoting the piece.

                  Anyway it seems nuance is lost. Obviously my white and non-white binary way of thinking

                  • Incognito …
                    9 December 2022 at 12:19 pm

                    Your flippant comment about cell phone emission conspiracy theories came in the middle of a discussion thread about donor blood. That triggered a Mod note but you keep digging in, litigating, and wasting my time.

                    You’re approaching the cliff’s edge where the ban hammer is waiting for you because we’re over it.

                    Start contributing to other comment threads or leave, voluntarily or otherwise.

                • Andy …
                  9 December 2022 at 11:59 am

                  " and where your own personal beliefs start & stop."

                  Do you ask all your commenters here to divulge their personal beliefs?

              • weka …
                9 December 2022 at 12:00 pm

                It's actually quite simple. I'll use this comment as an example

                I was watching a presentation yesterday about Statins and how pharma pushes them. Some were even advocating for putting Statins in the public water supply at one point.

                Some day the public might actually thank these so-called "anti-vaxxers" for standing up to corporate tyranny.

                Apparently, according to this presenter I refer to, this dates back to Reagan liberalising the pharma industry and letting them conduct their own clinical trials.

                .https://thestandard.org.nz/daily-review-07-12-2022/#comment-1924905

                What you've done there is this,

                1. made several statements that on TS would be considered controversial
                2. referred to a video without giving a reference

                What that does is create bad debate culture. People react to #1 but have nothing to reference. They either try and argue against your point without knowing what it really means, or they have to spend time trying to get you to provide a reference.

                From now on, you, Andy, will have to provide references everytime. and at the the time you make the comment. If you don't, you will get a short ban. Subsequent bans will increase exponentially until one of the mods gets sick of it and gives you a longer ban.

                The reason for this is that the Mod notes in the back end are littered with mods having to get you inline with the debate culture here.

                I'm also going to strongly suggest you stop making comments like this,

                Take it or leave it. It's someone's presentation.

                .https://thestandard.org.nz/daily-review-07-12-2022/#comment-1925040

                You don't get to decide where the boundaries are here, the mods do. You don't get to decide what is acceptable referencing, the mods to. Your referencing was fine in that comment, but the attitudinal stuff is grating. It won't take long to just ban you because I'm sick of the bullshit. Take moderation seriously and there won't be a problem.

  7. Incognito 7
    8 December 2022 at 9:31 pm

    "Agreement was reached that each councillor will have the opportunity on a rotating basis immediately prior to the opening of the ordinary Council Meeting to recite karakia, make statements of choice and forms of reflection.

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/pou-tiaki/300760449/kaipara-mayor-to-allow-karakia-a-week-after-banning-the-practice-from-council-meetings

    It is good to see what can be achieved when people are prepared to listen with an open mind. Respect!

    • RedLogix 7.1
      8 December 2022 at 11:02 pm

      Which was my core argument as well – that whatever they do in a spiritual or religious nature in the political context – it has to be a matter of choice.

      So yes a good outcome.

      • Shanreagh 7.1.1
        9 December 2022 at 12:50 am

        Good outcome.

        Your view though RL was that by its very name, language and positioning at the start of a meeting that the karakia was an expression of a Maori religion.

        This was despite the example provided by Sacha having no religious aspect to it. It had a reference to discussions being as smooth as a greenstone sea.

        • Molly 7.1.1.1
          9 December 2022 at 8:48 am

          Posted for original discussion but TS was offline, so saved:

          "I have no problem with the kariaka (as shown) becoming as familiar as a greeting such as:

          "I want to welcome everyone who has come here today for…, I hope by the end of the session everyone will have had an opportunity to speak, and we will have achieved….".

          Brief, appropriate and to the point.

          This is not an unforeseen backlash though, in regards to the mayor's electoral campaign.

          I'm just surprised it is not part of local government policy, and able to be removed so arbitrarily.

          The issue should be addressed there if the karakia is considered to be an essential recognition of tangata whenua in local council meetings, as this one mayor is fundamentally an incident that has highlighted a procedural loophole.

          In practice, there are some who don't provide such concise karakias. The list of karakias is a reference list, not a proscribed usage. Also, there are some with religious beliefs who insert references to their God/s in the karakia.

          I want to say – on record – that if this was the case in terms of the English greeting, I would want the long-windedness and religious references to be addressed as well.

          So, keep it short, relevant and secular. (The same criteria that applies to any English greetings.)

          Address the procedural guidelines – by having a discussion on whether it is a requirement or a choice, and then making the guidelines reflect that decision."

          From incognito's link:

          "Jepson backed down on his controversial decision to ban karakia at council meetings following an "open and frank" meeting yesterday that resulted in a compromise where each councillor will take turns in opening and closing meetings with a karakia, affirmation, prayer or reflection of the day."

          The inclusion of a prayer makes it non-secular, which is a problem.

          Affirmation, or reflection of the day is so vague as to be meaningless.

          Better off to: keep it short (under 1 min) – keep it secular.