In short, evolving genetic resistance to malaria seems like a better route than trying to prevent or treat it. I’d like to understand why that’s controversial (I’m assuming it is). EA-ists are surely (some form of) utilitarians. Isn’t it more likely that trying to combat malaria will produce more suffering (by keeping non-resistant strains in the gene-pool) than by allowing us to evolve resistance?
I’m not saying ‘stop trying to treat malaria’ exactly, but I am saying ‘maybe we should put our long-termist hats on and reconsider whether it is actually (so clearly) a good thing to do’.
I’m almost certain I’m overlooking something, so looking to correct my thinking (i.e. please don’t attack me, and rather help me understand).
The problem with malaria...
In short, evolving genetic resistance to malaria seems like a better route than trying to prevent or treat it. I’d like to understand why that’s controversial (I’m assuming it is). EA-ists are surely (some form of) utilitarians. Isn’t it more likely that trying to combat malaria will produce more suffering (by keeping non-resistant strains in the gene-pool) than by allowing us to evolve resistance?
I’m not saying ‘stop trying to treat malaria’ exactly, but I am saying ‘maybe we should put our long-termist hats on and reconsider whether it is actually (so clearly) a good thing to do’.
I’m almost certain I’m overlooking something, so looking to correct my thinking (i.e. please don’t attack me, and rather help me understand).