Prev Med. 2011 Oct;53(4-5):250-2. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2011.07.006. Epub 2011 Jul 30.
This paper provides some philosophical comments on Rose's prevention paradox, suggesting why that paradox seems so difficult, and why policy-makers should care about solving it. The assumptions underlying the paradox section sets out two ways of understanding the notion of "benefit" in public health programmes, and shows how the prevention paradox arises from combining both understandings. Thinking through the paradox section argues that if we find the second understanding of benefit appealing, then we should rethink how we typically assess preventive public health measures. The implications section shows how these theoretical arguments imply that public health practitioners should care about solving the prevention paradox, rather than simply denying the legitimacy of one of the two views from which it arises.
本文对罗丝的预防悖论进行了一些哲学评论，探讨了为什么这个悖论看起来如此棘手，以及政策制定者为何应该关注解决这个问题。悖论部分的假设提出了两种理解公共卫生计划中“利益”概念的方式，并展示了预防悖论是如何由这两种理解结合而产生的。通过对悖论部分的思考，认为如果我们认为第二种利益理解方式有吸引力，那么我们就应该重新思考我们通常如何评估预防公共卫生措施。影响部分表明，这些理论论点意味着公共卫生从业者应该关注解决预防悖论的问题，而不仅仅是简单地否认悖论所产生的两种观点之一的合法性。
