27 ms·
> It's not reasonable to speak concretely about the result of multiplying a rough estimate by a large number. I didn't speak concretely, and it is reasonable i
by Closi 6y ago
> It's not reasonable to speak concretely about the result of multiplying a rough estimate by a large number.
I didn't speak concretely, and it is reasonable if you clearly list your assumptions! But the broader point is that if we were looking at QALY as a measure that's very different to deaths.
> there would likely have been much more death
There might have been more death, but it's also worth considering what this is in terms of net-QALY as the average age of death is >80. If we lock down 30 people for a year to add 3 years of life to someone, is that a good trade?
- maxerickson 6y ago287,500 lifetimes? And now you are being absurd, jumping from 1/3 quality of life reduction as an estimate to locking people down for a year. I'm in the US, where the harshest restriction has been on businesses, people have never been locked in their homes. We've had shelter in place orders and similar, but the enforcement of those amounts to "please".
- Closi 6y ago> "I'm from a different country with low enforcement and a generally nice climate, and can't imagine that being stuck in your home in England and not be allowed to see anyone during the winter can have a negative impact on the quality of life!" Yeah, I stand by that as a rough estimate.
- maxerickson 6y agoIt's barely going to get above freezing here for the next 3 months. 2 degrees Celsius today, as Winter just starts to take hold.