More than one US politician has complained about the economic costs of social distancing in the fight against COVID-19, pointing out that we don’t shut down the economy even though 20,000-50,000 people die of the flu every year, and similar numbers die in car wrecks. This ignores the consistent predictions that COVID-19, if unopposed, would kill many hundreds of thousands and that even with the measures we’re currently taking, it’s likely to kill a couple hundred thousand.
But it also ignores the costs that we incur in our efforts to dial back the losses from things like the flu and car wrecks.
Sixty years ago, deaths per million vehicle miles was about 50; with modern safety technology, it’s down to around 10. However, modern cars would certainly be cheaper if we left out things like ABS, ESC, seat belts, airbags, crumple zones side impact beams, and so on. Not just the purchase cost, but also the repair costs. But these safety measures mean that only 35,000 people die in crashes every year in the US; if we were still driving cars with 1960s-era engineering, we’d be killing 175,000 people every year (and grievously injuring hundreds of thousands more).
Having said all that, I’m curious about the flu, as it’s perhaps a bit easier for someone in the know to find relevant cost figures. How much does the US spend every year to keep the annual flu body count down in the tens of thousands? Ignore the cost of treating the infected, and just consider the cost of pre-season surveillance, vaccine development/production/distribution/administration.
Bonus points: how many lives would the annual flu epidemic claim if vaccines didn’t exist?
The 1957 Asian flu epidemic (H2N2) epidemic killed 116,000 in the U.S.
The 1968-69 Hong Kong flu (H3N2) killed about 100,000 here.
There were flu vaccines back then, but they weren’t as effective, and there wasn’t as much emphasis on the general public getting them.
Accounting for the larger U.S. population now, I’d wager that without any protective measures, an outbreak of good old fashioned influenza could easily kill 150,000 Americans. Of course that doesn’t even begin to factor all the lost productivity and social disruption from people who get sick but don’t die.
As you pursue questions like this you will eventually focus on an important but uncomfortable question: How much is a human life worth? This should be a major debate in GD. (I’d start such a thread myself, but my track record shows that I’m a very poor thread starter.)
For some people, putting a dollar value on human life will seem evil or sacrilegious. But there’s no other objective way to approach many important decisions.
But treating the infected is a big part of keeping the body count low, isn’t it? The CDC says (PDF) that “[the flu] costs the U.S. approximately $10.4 billion* in direct costs for hospitalizations and outpatient visits for adults.”
I did find this paper that states “influenza vaccination resulted in total costs of $US 1.7 billion (95%CI: $US 0.3–4.0 billion) in 2006-07 and $US 1.8 billion (95%CI: $US 0.1–4.1 billion) in 2008-09”.
I’m reminded of the argument people commonly use when promoting a new safety measure i.e. roadway speed bumps or banning a product: “You can’t put a price on a child’s life.”
Actually, we make these types of calculations constantly.
If we truly wanted to eliminate threats to children we’d ban driving in residential neighborhoods entirely and prohibit sales of household cleaning products, drugs etc. because accidental deaths could not be prevented otherwise.
It’s all about compromise and reasonableness of actions. At some point, we are putting a price on human lives. How this affects our response to COVID-19 (or any disease) is a matter for legitimate debate.