Conversation

2) as with many, this one doesn’t bother attempting a cost benefit analysis. If it did, it would maybe notice that the claimed annual damages from the flu are around $50b. How about it’s proposed countermeasures?
2
52
3) well, US GDP is $20T, so we have 0.2% to play with—0.4% if you double it to include endemic COVID. Maybe his proposed interventions would halve the risk—back to 0.2%. That’s the equivalent of missing 1 day per year of work.
1
31
4) the proposed interventions include: A) vaccines. I think the cost of this alone is ~ 1 work day per year. B) Zoom instead of meetings. Much of our business wouldn’t have happened without in person meetings. C) staying home if you have a sick housemate (already 1/year)
4
32
5) D) semi-constant mask wearing … So his proposed solutions outweigh their claimed benefit by something like 5-10x. What’s up with that? Well, mostly he never bothered checking the cost vs benefits. If he had, he would have been forced to clean up his post.
3
49
Replying to
I agree re. costs & benefits. Is your math rigorous? Studies suggest econ benefit of flu vax; how do you conclude covid vax is net negative? My last shot was 45 min away from work, not a day. Quantitative evidence for cost of sick staying home or wearing masks in public?
1
Replying to
to be clear I'm not sure it's net negative--to a decent extent I think he's understimating cost of flu/covid, not just underestimating costs of fighting them. shots vary a lot depending on whether they knock you out for a few days -- seems to happen to some but not all people.
Replying to
That’s fair. I agree with your general point, that it pays to look at costs and benefits, and ideally in a quantitative and evidence-based way.