= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
StRev comments on Rationality Quotes November 2012 - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (898)
If it's moral for someone to spend that much of their money on a house or a yacht, it's moral for them to spend it on a heart transplant, but it may be a net utility loss for the patient.
The first heart transplant was performed 45 years ago. Almost half a century of effort has yielded a state of affairs that could politely be described as 'dire'. Immoral, no, imprudent yes.
Yes and yes. The return on investment is appalling. A back of the envelope estimate I did a while ago, IIRC, showed that public health investment had a RoI 6 to 8 orders of magnitude better than organ transplants.
I also think it's immoral that the donor's estate is denied even a tiny share of the revenue.
See above, re: houses and yachts.
But the RoI for the patient himself is great. You present an argument against publicly funded research into heart transplants, but not against doing them at all.
If the patient is spending her own money, the RoI is still terrible compared to comparable interventions like hiring a personal trainer, diet coach, personal chef, etc. that could have forestalled the need for a heart transplant. Furthermore, the actually existing health infrastructure, particularly organ procurement, is so deeply entangled with the state, that it's difficult to speak meaningfully of strictly privately funded efforts.
Even having purchased all those, a person may need a heart transplant. Genes, disease, accidents, and nurture while young (and unable to choose one's own lifestyle) all strongly influence the eventual need for a heart transplant. So for many people, even a lot of lifetime investment into their health won't mean the RoI on a heart transplant will be bad.
Also, at the point where you choose whether to have a heart transplant, the RoI needs to be compared with other things you can do with that money during the time you have left to live without a transplant. If you have a lot of money, and the transplant improves your QALY, then the RoI is likely good.