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
-
-
Show this thread
-
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
Show this thread -
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
Show this thread -
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
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Kind of like everything, really
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I would humbly suggest the evidence does not point to an answer in complex problems - values come into play - and - once you are there - the public's voice should be part of the conversation - the values being used to guide decisions should be transparent/agreed upon.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
And there seemingly are no consequences to the epidemiologists who failed worse than the sightless gypsy in their “predictions”. Lord were they terrible in this pandemic
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Has anyone calculated the QALYs value for UK approach to managing COVID?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.