That won't help much because the quantifiable material loss in that scenario wouldn't be much.

> And if he is right the gain will far outweigh the loss

So is your suggestion that medical policy based on balancing humours is actually effective altruism?

Balancing humors? Odd way to phrase that. I am saying that if you save 1 kid in an extreme situation but injured 1000 to do it you are causing more harm than good.

Our current policies favor fearmongering and cherry-picking to influence people to seek medical treatment that they don't need and come with side effects.

The fact that Doctors get paid a kickback for high child VAX percentages alone is enough to make me toss out the whole idea.

You should post this as a market on Polymarket.