3 ms·
I appreciate what you are trying to do, but I cannot agree with determining the cost of a drug based on potential loss of income/productivity. Should the CEOs t
by east2west 12y ago
I appreciate what you are trying to do, but I cannot agree with determining the cost of a drug based on potential loss of income/productivity. Should the CEOs therefore get first dips on life saving treatment because they have big impact on his/her employees? Do patients in developed countries have an economic right to better treatment first than people in developing countries? Are some lives worth more than others? I don't think we are ready to go down this route. Incidentally, a very expensive drug is posing these questions, implicitly. But explicit statements like yours are not politically practical or even humane. Ten years ago it was outrageous to hear a nurse to tell a kid's parents to pay up or watch their only child die.
- Houshalter 12y agoThat's not what parent comment is arguing at all. But I don't see why not. Money very likely correlates with value to society and would be a better heuristic than pure randomness - which is also unfair. Although hopefully it never becomes an issue of course - these hypothetical situations where we get to actually choose who lives and dies rarely happen in reality. And obviously it violates cultural values, so would not be a good idea to actually try to implement.