Recent Medical Advances

The Times (the real Times, in London, not that fake Times in New York that almost got us fired) reports that this April the Royal College of Nurses, at their annual convention, will take up the question of how best to assist patients who like to cut themselves:

NURSES want patients who are intent on harming themselves to be provided with clean blades so that they can cut themselves more safely.

They say people determined to harm themselves should be helped to minimise the risk of infection from dirty blades, in the same way as drug addicts are issued with clean needles.

This could include giving the "self-harm" patients sterile blades and clean packets of bandages or ensuring that they keep their own blades clean. Nurses would also give patients advice about which parts of the body it is safer to cut.

In a bid to retire the trophy for stating the obvious, The Times notes that the proposal "is likely to provoke controversy." A safe bet. Just to be sure its readers aren't confused, and have all necessary information at their fingertips, the article explains:

At present nurses are expected to stop anyone doing physical harm to themselves and to confiscate any sharp objects ranging from razor blades to broken glass and tin cans.

The pattern, of course, mirrors not only provision of syringes to junkies, but also passing out condoms to kids. The theme is that people are going to do certain dangerous, stupid, destructive things, so we might as well see to it that the damage isn't any greater than it has to be.

It would seem to any self-respecting undergraduate economics major that by reducing the cost of the behavior (by minimizing damage, and reducing the social stigma by this sort of official support) the result will be an increase in the underlying behavior. And it may well be that the negative effect of such encouragement completely overwhelms any positive result. For example, have unintended pregnancies declined since condoms, other birth control devices, and cradle-to-grave sex education became universal in the United States? We didn't think so.

And this principle has application to a wide range of dangerous behavior often accompanied by unintended or otherwise collateral damage: The arsonist whose ignorance causes an explosion, or the destruction of more than his target building; the murderer whose aim is so poor that he kills some pain-in-the-ass innocent bystander; the joy-riding teen whose defensive driving skills are inadequate to a high-speed chase; the poisoner whose potion causes unnecessary suffering. Extend the list at your leisure.

Can we make this stuff up? No, we can not. Complete story HERE.