Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Bioethics. 2021 Nov;35(9):947-955. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12928. Epub 2021 Aug 31.
As we combat the COVID-19 pandemic, both the prescription of antimicrobials and the use of biocidal agents have increased in many countries. Although these measures can be expected to benefit existing people by, to some extent, mitigating the pandemic's effects, they may threaten long-term well-being of existing and future people, where they contribute to the problem of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). A trade-off dilemma thus presents itself: combat COVID-19 using these measures, or stop using them in order to protect against AMR. Currently, I argue, we are choosing to continue with these measures, and thus to prioritize combatting COVID-19, without adequate ethical reflection on the AMR-associated costs of these measures. I discuss the magnitude of the possible costs and benefits involved in making the trade-off in favour of COVID-19, and their distribution. I highlight two salient aspects of distribution that can help determine whether combatting COVID-19 whilst exacerbating AMR produces justly distributed costs and benefits: distribution between current and future populations, and distribution between existing geographical populations. Adopting this account, I argue that based on the magnitude and distribution of costs and benefits of combatting COVID-19, we have good reason to rethink this trade-off, and instead consider prioritizing protecting current and future people against AMR, but jettisoning measures against COVID-19 that also exacerbate AMR.
在我们抗击 COVID-19 大流行的过程中,许多国家都增加了抗生素的处方和消毒剂的使用。虽然这些措施可以在一定程度上减轻大流行的影响,从而使现有人群受益,但它们可能会威胁到现有和未来人群的长期福祉,因为它们加剧了抗生素耐药性(AMR)问题。因此,出现了一种权衡困境:是使用这些措施来抗击 COVID-19,还是停止使用这些措施以防止 AMR。目前,我认为,我们选择继续采取这些措施,从而优先考虑抗击 COVID-19,而没有对这些措施与 AMR 相关的成本进行充分的伦理反思。我讨论了在有利于 COVID-19 的权衡中涉及的可能成本和收益的大小及其分配。我强调了分配方面的两个突出方面,这有助于确定在加剧 AMR 的情况下抗击 COVID-19 是否会产生公正分配的成本和收益:当前和未来人口之间的分配,以及现有地理人口之间的分配。根据对 COVID-19 进行干预的成本和收益的大小和分配情况,我认为我们有充分的理由重新考虑这种权衡,而不是优先考虑采取措施来保护当前和未来的人群免受 AMR 的影响,而是放弃那些加剧 AMR 的针对 COVID-19 的措施。