Abstract
The article by Sprinkle et al 1 published in the May issue of theArchivesis an example of how the science of economics can be employed to justify most any conclusion. Costs and benefits depend on what factors are laid on the scale. In this case, some of the important ingredients were left on the shelf. The authors criticize other work that focuses solely on the decreased risk of pneumococcal sepsis in infants receiving prophylactic penicillin after the diagnosis of sickle-cell disease (SCD) was made. They say, [This approach] does not account for a range of other unambiguously valuable effects. The early diagnosis of non-SCD conditions such as sickle trait, nonsickle hemoglobinopathies, and some thalassemias allows the timely provision of genetic, medical, and social-services counseling. A valid cost-benefit analysis would attempt to factor in the extent of harm inflicted on the huge number of infants with false-positive results, as
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.