4 ms·

I think the problem isn't that it's unethical to intentionally put someone in harms way, but rather whether or not there can be an informed consent. When the vi

I think the problem isn't that it's unethical to intentionally put someone in harms way, but rather whether or not there can be an informed consent. When the virus first came up, it was completely unknown that the risk of long term impairment might have been, and now we know it was/is pretty severe.

benchaney 6y ago
This is incorrect. Informed consent requires that people be given the best available information. If that contains a lot of unknowns, and they understand that, and consent to it, that is completely valid.
loveistheanswer 6y ago
>When the virus first came up, it was completely unknown that the risk of long term impairment might have been, and now we know it was/is pretty severe. Only 10% of positive cases (not including untested infections) have any impairment after 3 weeks. https://covid.joinzoe.com/post/covid-long-term?fbclid=IwAR1RxIcmmdL-EFjh_aI- https://covid.joinzoe.com/post/covid-long-term?fbclid=IwAR1R...