Extreme weather event attribution — the identification of the role of anthropogenic climate change in weather events — has made substantial advances in the recent decade. Alongside these developments, the idea of a loss and damage fund has gained momentum as a way to provide funding for climate change impacts experienced in vulnerable countries. Here, we argue that much of the information available from extreme event attribution (EEA), although far from perfect, can already substantially inform loss and damage activities. The arguments against use of EEA in this context¹ warrant close scrutiny as these objections may be used by some to justify further delay, with the consequence that vulnerable developing countries will continue to face significant loss and damage without assistance. The critics, we argue, not only miss what attribution can already supply, but also fail to conceive the extent and urgency of the demand for EEA information in the loss and damage context.