This is one of the reasons that I usually stay away from offering explicit policy opinions. As a scientist, I can give you a pretty good estimate of the impact of COVID-19, but it's up to us as a society to decide what to do about that
https://twitter.com/GidMK/status/1388991268580040710
We can say from an epidemiological viewpoint which path has which benefits and costs, but ultimately the decision of which is more beneficial is not scientific
Some people have consistently argued that freedom is the most important value
This is a valid ethical viewpoint! Epidemiologically, we can perhaps place a cost on that ideation, but whether this cost is justified is not a scientific decision
This is a valid ethical viewpoint! Epidemiologically, we can perhaps place a cost on that ideation, but whether this cost is justified is not a scientific decision
For example, were lockdowns a good idea?
Basically impossible to answer, depends on your perspective
Did lockdowns cause or prevent death?
That's something that we can look at scientifically (still complex)
Basically impossible to answer, depends on your perspective
Did lockdowns cause or prevent death?
That's something that we can look at scientifically (still complex)
(As for many things, the answer to the question of whether lockdowns caused or prevented deaths appears to be, somewhat unsatisfyingly, "it depends")
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
