In 2005, Hurricane Rita caused 111 deaths. 3 deaths were caused by the hurricane. 90 were caused by the mass evacuation. … Exercise for the reader: Find other cases where cautionary measures are more dangerous than nothing.
The ratio of 90 deaths from the evacuation to 3 deaths from the hurricane looks bad, but is in fact irrelevant. The proper comparison would be 90 deaths from evacuating, to X deaths that would have resulted had those people stayed put, or performed some other action in preparation. While it’s possible a proper estimate of the risk of staying near the hurricane’s projected path would show that it was the less dangerous course, the abstract you linked doesn’t suggest that is a topic covered by the paper.
The ratio of 90 deaths from the evacuation to 3 deaths from the hurricane looks bad, but is in fact irrelevant. The proper comparison would be 90 deaths from evacuating, to X deaths that would have resulted had those people stayed put, or performed some other action in preparation. While it’s possible a proper estimate of the risk of staying near the hurricane’s projected path would show that it was the less dangerous course, the abstract you linked doesn’t suggest that is a topic covered by the paper.
I guess the argument is the same as for the drugs: the evacuation effort should be scaled back until it causes equally many deaths as the hurricane.
Actually, until the marginal lives lost and saved are equal, which says nothing about the total.