Having read the Givewell page, the side effects / resistance stuff that the now replaced SCI woman in charge of evaluation was worried about are under-explored compared to what I expected of givewell (interestingly, we might be incentivising SCI to omit the routine and systematic collection and reporting of side effects and resistance—and others are not really likely to do it). This is really disappointing because I remember Toby and I being worried about this stuff back in 2010/2011.
The evidence for developmental correlates of deworming is much weaker than I had assumed knowing about the developmental correlates of under-nutrition (e.g. growing up with a hole in your brain).
Further, that evidence probably relies on the extra schooling from what they’ve said. I yet again revise my estimate of SCI’s effectiveness downwards :( :) (depending on if I’m sad about the lower marginal effectiveness or happy about having discovered something useful!)
Woah! Hauke Hillebrand and some Harvard professors cause an extremely quick update with a facebook post to one of his first blogs on SCI effectiveness.
1 - Probably yes. GiveWell go into a reasonably detailed discussion of evidence for this here.
2 - Certainly yes. But I think these effects are likely to be weaker for infants than for young adults.
Very helpful as ever Owen, thanks!
Having read the Givewell page, the side effects / resistance stuff that the now replaced SCI woman in charge of evaluation was worried about are under-explored compared to what I expected of givewell (interestingly, we might be incentivising SCI to omit the routine and systematic collection and reporting of side effects and resistance—and others are not really likely to do it). This is really disappointing because I remember Toby and I being worried about this stuff back in 2010/2011.
The evidence for developmental correlates of deworming is much weaker than I had assumed knowing about the developmental correlates of under-nutrition (e.g. growing up with a hole in your brain).
Further, that evidence probably relies on the extra schooling from what they’ve said. I yet again revise my estimate of SCI’s effectiveness downwards :( :) (depending on if I’m sad about the lower marginal effectiveness or happy about having discovered something useful!)
Woah! Hauke Hillebrand and some Harvard professors cause an extremely quick update with a facebook post to one of his first blogs on SCI effectiveness.
It seems to help HIV to the point where its effectiveness should be considered doubled (pending checks on the quality of the research).
And HIV very much is a YLD we would want to take extremely seriously, for the reasons you mentioned!
Very helpful as ever Owen, thanks!