You’re making a really big assumption or at least stating things in a poor way.
Even if this plan worked and you saved 725,000 people from dying from malaria they are still living in a very dangerous condition in many cases and, purely to play devil’s advocate here, you may end up saving those 725,000 from dying this year while creating the condition of having 725,000 additional mouths to feed that leads to the death of 300,000 the following year.
Was that act of forcing a solution on those people so heroic in this case?
Now, this isn’t to say we should not do this (assuming we get the buy in for the plan from those being helped) but rather that we should be careful about where we’re drawing the box boundaries for the analysis to conclude it will be helpful. I have the impression that there is a bit of a myopia that is getting ignored.
You’re making a really big assumption or at least stating things in a poor way.
Even if this plan worked and you saved 725,000 people from dying from malaria they are still living in a very dangerous condition in many cases and, purely to play devil’s advocate here, you may end up saving those 725,000 from dying this year while creating the condition of having 725,000 additional mouths to feed that leads to the death of 300,000 the following year.
Was that act of forcing a solution on those people so heroic in this case?
Now, this isn’t to say we should not do this (assuming we get the buy in for the plan from those being helped) but rather that we should be careful about where we’re drawing the box boundaries for the analysis to conclude it will be helpful. I have the impression that there is a bit of a myopia that is getting ignored.