The entire field of epidemiology is about balancing cost and benefit, risk and reward. There is no choice without consequences, even the seemingly trivial ones
Most Master of Public Health courses (MPH) have a health economics unit for precisely this reason. Enacting a policy in one place invariably (at best) takes away resources that you would otherwise use somewhere else
This is a big part of the reason I spend so much time trying to convey nuance. There is no decision we can make for public health that is purely good
There are no silver bullets
There are no silver bullets
These are things that every epidemiologist knows, and as a field we have been trying to convey since the start of the pandemic
Risk, and reward
Cost, and benefit
Everything is a trade-off
Risk, and reward
Cost, and benefit
Everything is a trade-off
Government restrictions to prevent COVID-19 have benefits
They have costs
Deciding NOT to prevent COVID-19 is precisely the same
Which decision is better? That is where the evidence comes in
They have costs
Deciding NOT to prevent COVID-19 is precisely the same
Which decision is better? That is where the evidence comes in
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
