Re: Antibiotic Resistent Bacteria
Alypius Skinner wrote: This brings up the larger question of whether the economy experiences a net gain or a net loss from constant government tinkering, taxes, regulation, bureaucracy, paperwork, and general added complexity. Of course, some of this nanny state tinkering will provide a net benefit, even if only a slim one in many cases, but other cases will provide a net loss to society, and it is usually impossible to know which clever government program will result in net gains and which in net losses beforehand. It is even either impossible or difficult and expensive to discover which clever government programs are worthwhile after the fact. [...] Of course, since some role for the state is indispensable, such excesses cannot be entirely avoided, but I do think we need to ask whether, on balance, government micromanagement of the *private* sector is a net gain or a net loss or simply too close to call. Of these three possibilites, only one justifies the type of government program suggested by Fred Folvary. Evaluating proposed government schemes for further managing the free sector of the economy on a case by case basis is a well demonstrated failure. Correct: the choice is not one of no (little) government v. government mnaking the right descisions; but no (little) government v. government having the power to make certain descisions (whether these are on average right or wrong is an empirical answer, which I believe has been firmly established as on average: wrong!) - jacob braestrup
Re: Antibiotic Resistent Bacteria
Alypius Skinner wrote: PS--When I started to open Gil Guillory's post on this thread, I got a message saying it had been tampered with in transit. Is it still safe to open? It has a crypto-signature that does not match the content; no other suspicious attachments. It is presumably as safe as any unsigned mail. -- Anton Sherwood, http://www.ogre.nu/
Antibiotic Resistent Bacteria
Can economics provide any answers the the question, what should be done about the problem of deadly bacteria developing resistence to antibiotics? The reason I ask is it seems to be a prisoner's delimma. If everybody would forego the use of antibiotics, except in extreme circumstances, bacteria would not be able to evolve so quickly into antibiotic resistant strains. But I'm not everybody, I'm only me. I should take antibiotics whenever my health would benefit from my doing so. Warm regards, Michael Giesbrecht Internet Engineering Lucasfilm Ltd. I am anticipating the day when the possession of Tibet and Afghanistan will be represented as vitally necessary to the security of Kansas and Nebraska. There is no logical end to this elastic conception of 'security' short of the conquest of the whole world. --William Henry Chamberlin, War - Shortcut to Fascism, American Mercury, LI, 204 (December 1940)
RE: Antibiotic Resistent Bacteria
It seems to me that this problem is the same as the general problem of non-renewable resource use. If the use of antibiotics results in their being, after X uses, ineffective, then they are a limited resource, as we believe oil to be. All of the relevant literature applies. I am particularly impressed with what Murray Rothbard has to say about this in his _Man, Economy, and State_. From a modern philosophical perspective, I would also recommend the recent book by Jan Narveson, _Respecting Persons in Theory and Practice_, which has a chapter on the general problem of resource use. My normative take on this: If you want to take antibiotics, you are either correct (the diagnosis that you have a bacterial infection, as opposed to a virus) and it will be effective (the bacteria are not resistant). In this case, your own self-interest will guide you to the public good. You don't want to pay for and use the drug unless it works. It will certainly be the case (by stipulation) that antibiotics will start being less effective. When it becomes economically feasible, tests may be used to determine whether one's bacterial infection will respond to antibiotics. This might be about the time that the product of the incidence of resistant bacterial infections and the cost of treatment by antibiotics exceeds the cost of the test. Worries about future generations must be pooh-poohed. If the future generations argument has any validity, we should never use antibiotics. Gil Guillory, P.E. Process Design and Project Engineering KBR, KT-3131B email [EMAIL PROTECTED] phone 713-753-2724(w) or 281-362-8061(h) or 281-620-6995(m) fax 713-753-3508 or 713-753-5353 -Original Message- From: Michael Giesbrecht [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2002 12:40 PM To: ARMCHAIR (E-mail) Subject: Antibiotic Resistent Bacteria Can economics provide any answers the the question, what should be done about the problem of deadly bacteria developing resistence to antibiotics? The reason I ask is it seems to be a prisoner's delimma. If everybody would forego the use of antibiotics, except in extreme circumstances, bacteria would not be able to evolve so quickly into antibiotic resistant strains. But I'm not everybody, I'm only me. I should take antibiotics whenever my health would benefit from my doing so. Warm regards, Michael Giesbrecht Internet Engineering Lucasfilm Ltd. I am anticipating the day when the possession of Tibet and Afghanistan will be represented as vitally necessary to the security of Kansas and Nebraska. There is no logical end to this elastic conception of 'security' short of the conquest of the whole world. --William Henry Chamberlin, War - Shortcut to Fascism, American Mercury, LI, 204 (December 1940) smime.p7s Description: application/pkcs7-signature
