# this post is not off-topic

```You are in charge of funding medical research for an imaginary country.
There are 11 diseases in this country. Of disease sufferers, 80%
suffer from disease A, 11% from disease B, and 1% each suffer from each of
the remainin 8 diseases C-K. Every \$1 billion you spend on researching a
disease reduces the absolute number of sufferers from that disease by 1%.
(To clarify: that means that if you spend \$2 billion on disease B, you
reduce the total number of disease suffers by 2% of 11%.) You have \$11
billion. What is your optimal spending pattern?

(You can make this problem more interesting by introducing diminishing
returns. Suppose the first \$1 billion spent on a disease reduces deaths
from that disease by 1%, the next \$1 billion by 1/2%, the next \$1 billion
by 1/4%, etc.)

Does spending more on diseases A and B make sufferers of other diseases
"second class citizens"? Discuss.

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

```