Who was out of his mind?
To address the substantial issue -- the question of a certain Italian
professor's sanity when he suggested the present global fix was an excuse
for a new permanent state of exception governed by draconian, totalitarian
measures -- we read in an interview with Bjarne Robberstad, Professor of
Health Economics at the University of Bergen, Norway, that the overwhelming
numerical information regarding the present "crisis" is hardly matched by
an interest in fatalities that are due to budgetary allocations and other
measures in the health sector relating to the current scare. He states that
Covid 19 isn't particularly serious. On a scale from 1 to 6 it has the
second lowest degree of seriousness. The loss of good (quality) years of
life per patient is low: Generally it affects older patients that already
are seriously ill. Those who die have an average life expectancy of seven
years. At the same time hospitals have closed much of their ordinary
operations and ended treatments of conditions that are far more serious if
we base our judgement on the official definition of seriousness. These
priorities may be sensible, but they should be open to discussion. Could
they have health related consequences that we haven't yet considered?
*and* quality of life are important. It has some significance how daft
one's life is. Poor health or mortality are insufficient [criteria] by
themselves. Therefore we speak about "good years of life," or life
expectancy adjusted for quality [of life].
we actively move children who are otherwise at a minimal risk into a highprofessor was far off the mark in his characterisation of the measures
risk situation, in an attempt to prolong the life of some of those elderly?
Would we do so when the effectiveness of those measures is questionable,
and the economic effects of those measures also puts the elderly themselves
at risk?
In considering these question is it still "obvious" that said Italian