PhilGoetz 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: PhilGoetz 10 December 2009 04:49:18PM 0 points [-]

To make the cost argument, you'd need to also present the cost differences caused by earlier detection of a small number of cancers. The cost of treating a single case might be greater than the cost of testing a thousand cases.

I suspect that the only way skipping early detection can be a win, cost-wise, is if it enables more people to die before they receive costly treatment.

Comment author: mattnewport 10 December 2009 07:28:06PM 1 point [-]

Early detection can also lead to overdiagnosis. The report discusses that as a factor in their decision.