Re:The Sweden experiment: how no lockdowns led to mental hea...
by michaelmrose on Monday August 23, 2021 @09:59AM
(#28275802)
There isn't much difference between active and passive harm. The most notable thing about the trolley problem is our inate resistance to thinking rationally about that.
People in their 30s and 40s are dying and losing decades of life. Kids Even. Slowing down the spread and then vaccination has saved so many millions from rolling that die.
For myself and my wife for example my wife would virtually certainly be dead if she had contracted it and I wouldn't have great odds either. My lungs don't work that well now without benefit of covid
Then there is the damage done by the disease how do you properly value ravaged lungs and damaged bodies that decrease quality of life for the remainder of a life and end it prematurely? Better than half of asymptomatic survivors have lung damage even!
Then every case as a trillion chances at a better covid. How do you value THAT in your equation? Do you try to assign probability to various future death rates and multiply by probability of being realized?
> but actually it's probably more like 100 people being inside for a year stops 1 person being suffocated.
Plus 12 from being hospitalized and having substantial damage done to their bodies that decreases their lifespan by 5 years. Plus 20 more who didn't feel serious symptoms but still sustained substantial lung or cardiovascular damage and lost a year.
Even playing the same game I think you are behind the 8 ball.
We are all selfish. It's true but it's a vice not a justification. We ought to strive for better. The life you save may be your own.
People in their 30s and 40s are dying and losing decades of life. Kids Even. Slowing down the spread and then vaccination has saved so many millions from rolling that die.
For myself and my wife for example my wife would virtually certainly be dead if she had contracted it and I wouldn't have great odds either. My lungs don't work that well now without benefit of covid
Then there is the damage done by the disease how do you properly value ravaged lungs and damaged bodies that decrease quality of life for the remainder of a life and end it prematurely? Better than half of asymptomatic survivors have lung damage even!
Then every case as a trillion chances at a better covid. How do you value THAT in your equation? Do you try to assign probability to various future death rates and multiply by probability of being realized?
> but actually it's probably more like 100 people being inside for a year stops 1 person being suffocated.
Plus 12 from being hospitalized and having substantial damage done to their bodies that decreases their lifespan by 5 years. Plus 20 more who didn't feel serious symptoms but still sustained substantial lung or cardiovascular damage and lost a year.
Even playing the same game I think you are behind the 8 ball.
We are all selfish. It's true but it's a vice not a justification. We ought to strive for better. The life you save may be your own.