3 ms·

People on life-threatening situations shouldn't be relying on unreliable information. > semi-informed guess That is the last thing you should be doing in a li

by knolax 7y ago

People on life-threatening situations shouldn't be relying on unreliable information. > semi-informed guess That is the last thing you should be doing in a life-threatening situation.

DoreenMichele 7y ago
The person who posted this article has two children with a genetic disorder that makes them extremely vulnerable to respiratory infections. In one of his comments, he indicated he is considering fleeing to a summer house for six months. It's a big enough commitment that he no doubt doesn't want to jump the gun and do so with zero justification. But erring on the side of caution is absolutely the correct thing to do if you are responsible for two people at potentially very high risk (of death) due to the current situation concerning covid19.
- knolax 7y ago
  OP had claimed without context in the title (it seemed to have been editted now) that Asians had high predisposition to Covid-19 while Africans had low predisposition. From his comments it seems that OP's children are European. If someone in the same situation as OP had gone off from the title, they would've concluded that their children were safe because they were not Asian. This ignores the fact that according to the submission itself the eQLT variant associated with high production of ACE2 still makes up the majority in all populations including Europeans, meaning that their children are not safe as the title had suggested. This is the opposite of erring on the side of caution. One person in the comments has already concluded based of of the title that Covid-19 will not affect them because they are not Asian. This is dangerous.
  - jamesblonde 7y ago
    I understand your point. Your interpretation of my interpretation is not giving me the benefit of the doubt - i said higher susceptibility for certain population - not that you would be safe if you came from a certain population. That is, still, the gist of the paper. It is a hypothesis that different populations will have higher risk of acquisition (Chinese) than others.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]

by knolax 7y ago

People on life-threatening situations shouldn't be relying on unreliable information. > semi-informed guess That is the last thing you should be doing in a life-threatening situation.

DoreenMichele 7y ago

The person who posted this article has two children with a genetic disorder that makes them extremely vulnerable to respiratory infections. In one of his comments, he indicated he is considering fleeing to a summer house for six months. It's a big enough commitment that he no doubt doesn't want to jump the gun and do so with zero justification. But erring on the side of caution is absolutely the correct thing to do if you are responsible for two people at potentially very high risk (of death) due to the current situation concerning covid19.

knolax 7y ago
OP had claimed without context in the title (it seemed to have been editted now) that Asians had high predisposition to Covid-19 while Africans had low predisposition. From his comments it seems that OP's children are European. If someone in the same situation as OP had gone off from the title, they would've concluded that their children were safe because they were not Asian. This ignores the fact that according to the submission itself the eQLT variant associated with high production of ACE2 still makes up the majority in all populations including Europeans, meaning that their children are not safe as the title had suggested. This is the opposite of erring on the side of caution. One person in the comments has already concluded based of of the title that Covid-19 will not affect them because they are not Asian. This is dangerous.
- jamesblonde 7y ago
  I understand your point. Your interpretation of my interpretation is not giving me the benefit of the doubt - i said higher susceptibility for certain population - not that you would be safe if you came from a certain population. That is, still, the gist of the paper. It is a hypothesis that different populations will have higher risk of acquisition (Chinese) than others.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]