An argument for *random* COVID-19 testing. Tesing is biased toward the sick & ill. So we don't know how much COVID-19 there is or how dangerous it is. This uncertainty => over and/or under reaction. We can't manage what we don't measure respresentatively. https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/17/a-fiasco-in-the-making-as-the-coronavirus-pandemic-takes-hold-we-are-making-decisions-without-reliable-data/ …
I did a degree in ethics, I'm pretty well versed. I'm not saying there may not be some vague ethical arguments here, I'm saying if you tried to do it there'd be rioting in the streets
-
-
I'm not trying to make you defensive about your ethics training (I'm not an ethicist), I'm just pointing out that you are making ethical determinations that are not clear but advocating them as seemingly obvious choices.
-
Look, my point is not to attack you either, it's that this isn't an ethical simulation. I'm not saying we can't reason ourselves into a position where random testing is the most ethically defensible stance, I'm saying even if you could it's an obvious impossibility practically
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.