Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

It's probably better to act a bit too much than a too little. Human lives are at risk.


view as:

There is a balance at play also in terms of human lives. For some incomplete examples just think of old people losing mobility or their social connections because they had to stay home, people that delayed operations or periodic health checkups, deaths and suicides caused by economic downturns.

Even if we were to assume a human life to be incommensurable in terms of money, there are human lives also on the other side of the scale.

This was a bet just like many other situations, to lockdown early and hard was likely the better choice, but the details of that are yet to be seen.


That's a common fallacy. Doing something is not better than nothing when you don't know what you're doing.

Go tell that to Bolsonaro in Brasil.

There are reports from California that the number of suicides skyrocketed during the lockdown. Elsewhere media is reporting that chemo was canceled for some people, I read about one purported death because of that. Also a lot less cancer diagnosis were performed.

I mean, sometimes it looks like you are being careful but you're countermeasures actually could cause more harm.


Legal | privacy