If AMF is negative, then its oppositeâFMFâwould presumably be positive.
I am not sure about this. I think Andreasâ claim is that AMF may be negative due to indirect effects. So, conditional on AMF being negative, one should expect the indirect effects would dominate the direct ones. This means a good candidare for âMinus AMFâ, an organisation whose value is symmetric to that of AMF, would have both direct and indirect effects symmetric to those of AMF.
The name For Malaria Foundation (FMF) suggested to me an organisation whose interventions have direct effects with similar magnitude, but opposite sign of those of AMF. However, the negative indirect effects of intentionally increasing malaria deaths seem worse than the negative of the positive indirect effects of decreasing malaria deaths[1]. So, AMF being negative would imply FMF having positive direct effects, but in this case I would expect FMFâs indirect effects to be sufficiently negative for it to be overall net negative.
If youâre worried that a real-life FMF would not be truly symmetrical to AMF in its effects, just mentally replace it with âMinus AMFâ in my original comment. (Or imagine stipulating away any such differences.) It doesnât affect the essential point.
Thanks for following up!
I am not sure about this. I think Andreasâ claim is that AMF may be negative due to indirect effects. So, conditional on AMF being negative, one should expect the indirect effects would dominate the direct ones. This means a good candidare for âMinus AMFâ, an organisation whose value is symmetric to that of AMF, would have both direct and indirect effects symmetric to those of AMF.
The name For Malaria Foundation (FMF) suggested to me an organisation whose interventions have direct effects with similar magnitude, but opposite sign of those of AMF. However, the negative indirect effects of intentionally increasing malaria deaths seem worse than the negative of the positive indirect effects of decreasing malaria deaths[1]. So, AMF being negative would imply FMF having positive direct effects, but in this case I would expect FMFâs indirect effects to be sufficiently negative for it to be overall net negative.
I am utilitarian, but recognise saving a life, and abstaining from saving a live can have different indirect consequences.
If youâre worried that a real-life FMF would not be truly symmetrical to AMF in its effects, just mentally replace it with âMinus AMFâ in my original comment. (Or imagine stipulating away any such differences.) It doesnât affect the essential point.