# What's the logic in regulators tolerating death in one instance but not another? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 28, 2011, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-logic-in-regulators-tolerating-death-in-one-instance-but-not-another/590668 "2011-07-28T21:25:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 12\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2011, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-logic-in-regulators-tolerating-death-in-one-instance-but-not-another/590668/21 "2011-07-29T15:27:20Z")
> [@gatorslap](#): > > They only have the capacity to manufacture so many doses of the vaccine a year. I don’t think this is really an issue. If someone is buying the vaccine, the companies will make more of it. I think something like 140 million doses were made for the U.S. market this year and the U.S. is not the only country that orders flu vaccines. > [@](#): > > If all of a sudden _everyone_ is getting them, we’d have to come up with some sort of prioritization/waiting period scheme. I don’t think that would be a big deal. So maybe the plan would take a year to implement. If the U.S. starts ordering more shots, more companies will start making the vaccine or the current vaccine makers will expand their manufacturing. There are money and civil liberties issues with this idea but I don’t think making the vaccine is the problem. > [@](#): > > Some hardcore vegans are ethically opposed to the vaccines because they’re made from an animal product (grown inside chicken eggs). Companies are working on faster ways to make vaccines that don’t involve chicken eggs. This method may ultimately go the way of the dinosaur. > [@Omar\_Little](#): > > Now with regard to “cost benefit analysis”, Marley. Are you saying that saving a life from a traffic accident has a different benefit than saving a life from flu illness? No, saving a life is saving a life. I’m saying the costs and considerations of reducing flu deaths and traffic accident deaths are very different. As has been noted, a lot of people would say your civil liberties are being violated if the government requires you to get a shot. They’d say you have a right to decide what goes into your body. Not as many people will feel that way about new standards for cars. > [@](#): > > So what is the marginal cost to save one additional life via automobile regulation vs. the marginal costs to save one additional life via flu vaccines? The monetary cost isn’t the only issue, but it would be very interesting to see some figures on this. I’m not sure how easy it will be to find them. > [@](#): > > You seem to be implying that somewhere in the bowels of some government agency there is some master planner and making sure that cost benefit analysis is being done so that we as a government are making sure that if the marginal costs is greater than $x,xxx,xxx then don’t do anything. That’s not at all what I was saying since it’s obviously not true. But I am saying it’s a general answer to your question. As a society, we consider the issues and the costs differently (nevermind that different regulatory agencies and groups get involved in each decision). That’s why deaths might be accepted in one instance but not another. Like I said earlier, though, the government is not going to keep imposing new regulations on cars until deaths from accidents reach zero. Nobody thinks that’s possible. > [@](#): > > So if the marginal costs of introducing additional regulations over automobile safety were greater than the marginal costs of increasing the Flu vaccination rate from 40% to 70%, assuming the same number of lives saved, then we should not introduce new auto regulations? I haven’t made any comments on what we should or shouldn’t do. I’m trying to talk about the issues that go into making these kinds of decisions. And I’m not saying the raw dollars are the only issue. What would the other effects of the proposals be? How would people’s lives and rights and jobs be affected? What might we have to stop doing if we spend billions or trillions on these things? ---
**Author:** ![Omar\_Little](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/omar_little/32/269_2.png) [@Omar\_Little](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omar_Little)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2011, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-logic-in-regulators-tolerating-death-in-one-instance-but-not-another/590668/22 "2011-07-29T15:47:19Z")
> [@Stately\_Greek\_Automaton](#): > > As mentionned by shiftless, the government can’t force you to do something, they can punish you if you don’t do something though. In the case of automobile manufacturers, they’re fined. Would you propose something similar for people who avoid getting a shot? I’ll let others worry about the enforcement issues. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2011, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-logic-in-regulators-tolerating-death-in-one-instance-but-not-another/590668/23 "2011-07-29T15:48:24Z")
> [@shiftless](#): > > Is there any evidence that the vaccine actually does prevent flu or that it would, at least, prevent a significant number of deaths? [Yes.](http://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/qa/flushot.htm) > [@CDC](#): > > In studies of the seasonal flu shot, when the “match” between vaccine viruses and circulating viruses is close, the vaccine has been shown to prevent influenza in about 70%-90% of healthy persons younger than age 65 years. Among elderly persons living outside chronic-care facilities (such as nursing homes) and those persons with long-term (chronic) medical conditions (such as asthma, diabetes, or heart disease), the flu shot has been shown to be between 30% and 70% effective in preventing hospitalization for pneumonia and influenza. Among elderly nursing home residents, the flu shot has been shown to be most effective in preventing severe illness, secondary complications, and deaths related to the flu. In this population, the shot has been shown to be between 50% and 60% effective in preventing hospitalization or pneumonia and 80% effective in preventing death from the flu. [QUOTE=shiftless] I don’t follow the studies but it is my understanding that flu shot are just a mix of whatever viruses the manufacturers think might be around this season. They are not meant as a cure-all. [/quote] Your understanding is basically correct, although “think” makes it sound like people are just guessing when they’re actually working based on trends and guided by historical data about how the viruses mutates and such. But yes, the vaccine has to be formulated months in advance. Some years it’s a very good match for the seasonal flu and other years it’s not as good. If technological advances allow for the vaccine to be made faster, that would hopefully make for better matches. > [@](#): > > Sure, vaccines are wonderful things but that doesn’t mean that every single vaccine that is brought to market is 100% effective and 100% safe 100% of the time. And they cost money. All true. Some people do get the flu after getting the shot and that’s something that has to be considered as well, since assuming the vaccine is perfect would be unrealistic. > [@](#): > > I think vaccines should have a much higher testing requirement than seatbelt for example. I agree, although for a different reason: even a good vaccine has side effects, and the side effects of a seatbelt are pretty much nil. That being said, I’m not very sympathetic to arguments against mandatory vaccinations (although I don’t like the idea of tying it to voting) or against seatbelt laws. ---
**Author:** ![Omar\_Little](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/omar_little/32/269_2.png) [@Omar\_Little](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omar_Little)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2011, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-logic-in-regulators-tolerating-death-in-one-instance-but-not-another/590668/24 "2011-07-29T15:49:51Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > As a society, we consider the issues and the costs differently (nevermind that different regulatory agencies and groups get involved in each decision). That’s why deaths might be accepted in one instance but not another. Like I said earlier, though, the government is not going to keep imposing new regulations on cars until deaths from accidents reach zero. Nobody thinks that’s possible. > > I haven’t made any comments on what we should or shouldn’t do. I’m trying to talk about the issues that go into making these kinds of decisions. And I’m not saying the raw dollars are the only issue. What would the other effects of the proposals be? How would people’s lives and rights and jobs be affected? What might we have to stop doing if we spend billions or trillions on these things? I think you are spot on about the issues that should be considered, and it’s not as simple as mathmetical formula…I just wonder if there is someone or group or committee in our government that does consider and attempt to weigh those types of isses. It’s not apparent to me that there is. ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2011, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-logic-in-regulators-tolerating-death-in-one-instance-but-not-another/590668/25 "2011-07-29T15:54:59Z")
> [@Omar\_Little](#): > > Are you saying that the life of someone that suffers from a breathing disorder that catches the flu and dies is worth less than a 60 year old retiree that steps in behind a person backing out of a parking space and is run over and killed? > > Are you saying that someone who doesn’t catch the flu and lives another 2 years and then dies from another illness, is worth less than someone that is saved by a side impact airbag and lives another 30 years before dieing from breast cancer? > > Or are you implying that most of the people that die from the flu were going to die anyway, so there’s really no need for vaccinations anyway? If that’s the case, we should probably stop the CDC and DHS from their annual campaigns to get more people vaccinated, because that’s money down the drain. Most of the people who die from the flu are people who can be pre-identified as being high risk. From a cost-benefit standpoint, you focus your efforts on these people, and folks who have a lot of contact with them. Adults in good health are not particularly at risk for death from the flu, so there is much less value in pushing vaccinations on them. The “herd immunity” effect is limited because the virus mutates, and we have to constantly vaccinate in order to maintain even partial immunity. Similarly, people who are at the most risk of dying in a car accident get special seats and 5 point seat belts, whereas everyone else gets to use the 3 point belts. ---
**Author:** ![ENugent](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/4af34b/32.png) [@ENugent](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ENugent)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2011, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-logic-in-regulators-tolerating-death-in-one-instance-but-not-another/590668/26 "2011-07-29T15:55:28Z")
> [@Omar\_Little](#): > > I’ll let others worry about the enforcement issues. You have that luxury - the government does not. They choose battles they can win, in the main - if it’s very difficult to enforce, they may choose an education campaign to get people to do it voluntarily instead of a regulation that requires it. Like, say, the ones they have around adult vaccination. ---
**Author:** ![Omar\_Little](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/omar_little/32/269_2.png) [@Omar\_Little](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omar_Little)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2011, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-logic-in-regulators-tolerating-death-in-one-instance-but-not-another/590668/27 "2011-07-29T16:12:34Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > Most of the people who die from the flu are people who can be pre-identified as being high risk. From a cost-benefit standpoint, you focus your efforts on these people, and folks who have a lot of contact with them. Adults in good health are not particularly at risk for death from the flu, so there is much less value in pushing vaccinations on them. The “herd immunity” effect is limited because the virus mutates, and we have to constantly vaccinate in order to maintain even partial immunity. > > Similarly, people who are at the most risk of dying in a car accident get special seats and 5 point seat belts, whereas everyone else gets to use the 3 point belts. Good points. Extra penalties for those people that are employed by or are vendors to hospitals, schools, day cares, retirement communities, nursing homes, etc. that don’t get the vaccine. ---
**Author:** ![Omar\_Little](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/omar_little/32/269_2.png) [@Omar\_Little](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omar_Little)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2011, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-logic-in-regulators-tolerating-death-in-one-instance-but-not-another/590668/28 "2011-07-29T16:14:24Z")
> [@ENugent](#): > > You have that luxury - the government does not. They choose battles they can win, in the main - if it’s very difficult to enforce, they may choose an education campaign to get people to do it voluntarily instead of a regulation that requires it. Like, say, the ones they have around adult vaccination. I have that luxury because this thread is not about the implementation of a nationwide vaccine program…it’s about why regulators don’t apply consistent thinking in regard to their mandates and regulations. ---
**Author:** ![ENugent](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/4af34b/32.png) [@ENugent](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ENugent)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2011, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-logic-in-regulators-tolerating-death-in-one-instance-but-not-another/590668/29 "2011-07-29T17:24:36Z")
And my statement is that they do apply more consistent thinking than you are attributing to them - it’s just that they have to consider a wider range of issues than you’re interested in discussing. It’s perfectly reasonable to regulate more heavily in an area where enforcement is easy than an area where enforcement is hard. It’s really another aspect of that whole cost-benefit ratio, if costs of enforcement will be rather high in some areas and lower in others. ---
**Author:** ![Omar\_Little](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/omar_little/32/269_2.png) [@Omar\_Little](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omar_Little)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2011, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-logic-in-regulators-tolerating-death-in-one-instance-but-not-another/590668/30 "2011-07-29T17:27:59Z")
But we have state mandated vaccines for other types of illnesses, we just get creative on how they are applied and enforced. Not by fines. You don’t get vaccinated, you don’t get to attend school. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2011, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-logic-in-regulators-tolerating-death-in-one-instance-but-not-another/590668/31 "2011-07-29T17:33:29Z")
> [@Omar\_Little](#): > > You don’t get vaccinated, you don’t get to attend school. Unless your parents send the school a short letter that says they’re opposed to vaccinations, in which case you attend school and don’t get vaccinated. And for the record I think that’s a stupid exemption that should be eliminated. ---
**Author:** ![shiftless](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9c0ed/32.png) [@shiftless](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/shiftless)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2011, 5:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-logic-in-regulators-tolerating-death-in-one-instance-but-not-another/590668/32 "2011-07-29T17:41:04Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > [Yes.](http://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/qa/flushot.htm) Yes, went there right after I said don’t follow the studies. This is an awesome site that I would recommend to anyone talking obut vaccines. And also to anyone talking about cutting federal budgets. Some government programs (maybe not many, but some) we would all miss. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-logic-in-regulators-tolerating-death-in-one-instance-but-not-another/590668.md?page=1)