3 ms·
On the other hand the accurate comparison should be QALYs not deaths. Even leaving aside quality impacts, a 40 year old dying from lockdown-induced alcohol over
by ummonk 5y ago
On the other hand the accurate comparison should be QALYs not deaths. Even leaving aside quality impacts, a 40 year old dying from lockdown-induced alcohol overdose loses far more life years than a 70 year old dying from no-lockdown COVID.
- betwixthewires 5y agoIt is a good metric, but it comes off a bit callously, and if you're going to get into the weeds there you might need to consider that one persons years are not used as well as others by many metrics, so how do you calculate that? Income per year on average? Children reared? Discretionary spending as a judge to how well someone enjoyed their life? I'd say stopping at number of deaths is a better metric.
- wyager 5y agoQALY isn’t perfect (or even especially good), but it’s clearly better than number of deaths.
- betwixthewires 5y agoIf it's so clear why don't you draw a picture as to why.
- wyager 5y agoBecause saving someone who’s 95 years old and about to keel over isn’t, on expectation, as valuable as saving someone who’s 5 years old and has a whole life ahead of them.
- ummonk 5y agoIf you think a 70 year old dying is anywhere near as bad as a 10 year old dying, I don't know what to say to you.