Here is the problem with giving the precautionary principle unfettered standardless reign. Simple scenario. Assume It turns out to be nothing or it is something and a 2-4 week lock down keeps deaths at say 2k and 10k in these two simple scenarios. Was the precautionary 1/n
Principle valid in saving lives? We don't know based upon the information presented. What if I now tell you there were 20k MORE suicides or drug overdoses linked to unemployment or time spent at home. Many many times we focus on very observable headline grabbing deaths 2/n
or events and ignore the quiet unseen hidden deaths. This is one reason airplane deaths get lots of attention but car deaths are largely ignored. At the risk of being socially incorrect, we need to think long and hard about what are the second order effects we are running 3/n
that, and this is very important, put peoples lives at risk by taking the draconian measures we are gleefully embracing. I worry we are embracing a cure worse than the disease even if we just focus solely on human lives lost.
