MichaelBishop comments on Action vs. inaction - Less Wrong

7 Post author: PhilGoetz 30 November 2009 06:10PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (43)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: LauraABJ 30 November 2009 07:40:11PM 19 points [-]

The cost of a mammogram is about $100 and the cost of a breast biopsy is about $1000. Thus 2000 women X 10 years X $100/mammorgram + 8%X2000 women X $1000/biopsy = $2,160,000 per life saved.

This might be the calculation they actually looked at.

Comment author: MichaelBishop 30 November 2009 10:01:10PM *  0 points [-]

Really? The cost you are quoting for the procedures sounds low for the U.S., but I'm no expert. (comment reworded for clarity)

Comment author: RobinZ 30 November 2009 10:09:56PM *  0 points [-]

Note: the following is a response to a misunderstanding of MichaelBishop's comment in its original form, and refers to the price US society is willing to pay to save a human life.

Not really - I've heard US$1e6 cited before as a cutoff.

Comment author: MichaelBishop 30 November 2009 10:17:50PM 0 points [-]

I didn't mean the value of life was low as a cutoff for making a decision. I meant the cost of the procedures sounded lower than I would have expected them to be. I will clarify the original comment.

Comment author: RobinZ 30 November 2009 11:51:52PM 1 point [-]

Noted (literally)!