-
It's a central tenet of all of our public health policy. Do the benefits outweigh the risks?
And PHE and the government have decided that preventing exercise(with social distancing) would be deleterious to the mental and physical health of citizens to an extent that outweighs the risk of people staying at home 24/7.It's even the crux of the helmet debate isn't it? It's better for public health to have people out on their bikes exercising at the risk of a few extra head injuries than have fewer people out exercising at all.
Stonehedge-
And PHE and the government have decided that preventing exercise(with social distancing) would be deleterious to the mental and physical health of citizens to an extent that outweighs the risk of people staying at home 24/7.
Oh, I agree. I'm just always sceptical about statements starting 'It's clear that...' without explaining why it's clear. That's why I always found philosophy to be such a difficult subject, as you'd get long works starting from assumptions which were claimed to be 'self-evident' when I wasn't at all sure that they were.
Brommers
[citation needed]