 However, as Kamm (2007) argues, the doing /allowing distinction seems to be intuitively morally relevant independently of the loss/no-gain distinction. Imagine I am driving five healthy people to hospital to receive anti-venom against the plague of poisonous snakes that will hit town and kill all unprotected people in a few hours; I will not reach the hospital in time unless I drive over the one healthy person who is blocking my road. It seems intuitively impermissible for me to kill the one to save the five – even though all victims face losses. 