Thishttps://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/... draggable="false" alt="👇" title="Down pointing backhand index" aria-label="Emoji: Down pointing backhand index">debate is fundamental to outlining tradeoffs in covid responses. (Beautifully outlined by @NickTriggle)

Measuring covid impact isn’t just about mortality rates, but loss in life expectancy for EVERYONE. Eg, Avg life expectancy will decline 3 months if economy dips 6.4%.
/1 https://twitter.com/jpsenescence/status/1241335555289485313">https://twitter.com/jpsenesce...

This is a HARD conversation to have while people are dying in front of our eyes. But this concept of “excess deaths” is key.

Herd immunity was trying to deal with this tradeoff- until the public’s demand for a lockdown made it politically impossible not to change course.
/2

Boris Johnson didn’t want to communicate his herd immunity strategy because he was (rightly) worried that Tories would be seen as cruel and uncaring, and focused on the economy.

But covid tradeoffs are *actually* about premature deaths now vs premature deaths later.
/3

What fails to be understood in all of this is that the models- both epidemiological and economic- cannot substitute for moral judgement.

How do we value the lives of those who are alive vs an abstract life expectancy model?

That is what PM and Cabinet have been asked to do.
/4

PM and all heads of state are all being asked to choose between:

How many healthy will die prematurely + how many with underlying conditions will die prematurely
Vs
Months or years of lost life expectancy for everyone else

There are no good answers.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-51979654
/5">https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/heal...