←back to thread

233 points kamaraju | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
johnthesecure ◴[] No.43553996[source]
It's interesting to see the number of deaths caused by pollution. But everyone will die of something. Could it be that many of those people whose death was caused by pollution may have been frail and close to death anyway? I wonder if it would be more useful to talk about quality-life-years (QUALYs) lost as a result of pollution. Probably much harder to get that data though.
replies(12): >>43554014 #>>43554017 #>>43554026 #>>43554028 #>>43554051 #>>43554058 #>>43554062 #>>43554196 #>>43554512 #>>43554884 #>>43555071 #>>43559029 #
motorest ◴[] No.43554017[source]
> Could it be that many of those people whose death was caused by pollution may have been frail and close to death anyway?

What point are you trying to make? I mean, you don't seem to dispute that pollution can and does kill people.

replies(1): >>43554475 #
concordDance ◴[] No.43554475[source]
Yeah, but there's a big difference between dying a few months earlier when you'd already be bedridden with your mind mostly gone and dying 50 years early.

Which is why QALYs are such a good metric.

replies(2): >>43554866 #>>43555265 #
1. motorest ◴[] No.43555265[source]
> Yeah, but there's a big difference between dying a few months earlier (...)

What leads you to believe that's the case? And again what's the point of ignoring health risks because some victims might possibly have lower life expectancies?