This paper presents some impossibility results for certain views about what you should do when you are uncertain about which moral theory is true. I show that under reasonable and extremely minimal ways of defining what a moral theory is, it follows that the concept of expected moral choiceworthiness is undefined, and more generally that any theory of decision-making under moral uncertainty must generate pathological results.

Effective altruism (EA) requires that when we donate to charity, we maximize the beneficial impact of our donations. While we are in broad sympathy with EA, we raise a practical problem for EA, which is that there is a crucial empirical presupposition implicit in its charity assessment methods which is false in many contexts. This is the presupposition that the magnitude of the benefits (or harms) generated by some charity vary continuously in the scale of the intervention performed. We characterize a wide class of cases where this assumption fails, and then draw out the normative implications of this fact.

Hydrogen sulfide is a potent lethal gas. Supportive care, nitrite therapy and hyperbaric oxygen are the treatment modalities reported in the literature in cases of hydrogen sulfide exposure. We describe an industrial exposure in which 6 workers inhaled high concentrations of hydrogen sulfide when they entered a closed spreader tank partially filled with liquid swine manure. Five of the 6 lost consciousness, and 2 were agitated and poorly responsive on arrival to the emergency department despite having already received high-flow oxygen for nearly 1 hour. These 2 patients received nitrite therapy followed by orotracheal intubation and hyperbaric oxygen. All patients were discharged home without sequelae after short stays in hospital. The emergency management of hydrogen sulfide exposure is briefly reviewed.