5 ms·

> "As a basis for comparison, the risk of death from C19 is vastly less than the risk of death from driving your car home." He pointed out that there have been

> "As a basis for comparison, the risk of death from C19 is vastly less than the risk of death from driving your car home." He pointed out that there have been 36,000 automotive deaths. Is he really comparing the absolute number of deaths rather than the mortality rate? Come on Elon, you can do better than this.

vsareto 7y ago
The media goes back and forth like this all the time. I'm not surprised people are following by example, but it is disappointing. See: largest DJIA absolute point loss/gain headlines throughout the years.
Slimbo 7y ago
Also, the logical conclusion of that argument is we should do more about vehicle accidents, not ignore Covid-19!
- manicdee 7y ago
  No, the logical conclusion is that we take simple precautions every time we get in a car (which is an endemic disease), which is what keeps the fatality rate low, and we can take simple precautions to keep a pandemic from killing people. Cars are in what … top three or so causes of death alongside heart disease and cancer? Deaths from COVID-19 is the USA are only going to beat that number if the government truly screws the pooch in terms of testing, treatment and management. Wash your hands.
  - zelon88 7y ago
    Define what you mean by "screw the pooch." Currently COVID-19 response is a finely tuned balance of economic impact to death-toll. React too early and you'll experience an unacceptable economic impact. React too late and you'll experience an unacceptable death-toll. The reason this situation is so dire is not because of the lethality of the virus. It is because our medical infrastructure is not capable of treating patients in the capacity that this virus can infect them. The goal is not to prevent people from contracting COVID-19. The goal is to slow the spread of COVID-19 so that the number of cases which require hospitalization stays lower than the availability of hospital beds. If everyone got sick all at once the fatality rate would increase because people would be dying faster than they could be treated. So long as we can treat our ill faster than people become ill we can manage this situation even if 100% of humans eventually become infected. The balancing act comes into play when you also need to consider the impact to the economy. There is a saturation point that early responding countries will reach where even if they continue to increase their response they will only be increasing their economic impact without significantly decreasing the death-toll. Finding this balance is what governments are trying to do right now.
arrrg 7y ago
The risk is also not so much to individuals (well, indirectly) but rather to the healthcare system collapsing. Seems logical, though, that someone as self-centered and egomaniacal as Musk thinks of individual risk.
Tiktaalik 7y ago
lol at a car company ceo highlighting how dangerous cars are. Hmm! Maybe we should stop doubling down on automobile oriented infrastructure and rely on something safer instead.
londons_explore 7y ago
I think it's a 100% legit comparison to make, as long as you say "but, if these numbers change (and many experts believe they will), we will update this advice".
- spiderfarmer 7y ago
  Explain to me how this comparison makes sense.
  - londons_explore 7y ago
    Tomorrow, my chance of dying from COVID-19 is lower than my chance of dying in a car crash. In 3 weeks time, those probabilities might have changed. My behaviour today should reflect probabilities today, and my behaviour in 3 weeks should reflect probabilities then. My behaviour today has negligible impact on my chances in 3 weeks too. Collective behaviour might effect collective probabilities in 3 weeks, but even that is relatively minimal considering the nature of exponentials.
    - jjeaff 7y ago
      So, since -my- risk of catching measles is very low... I shouldn't get immunized, right?
    - geofft 7y ago
      Your behavior today has serious and direct impact on not only your chances in three weeks but on the lives of other people around you. A cluster of sick people in South Korea is traced to one person who attended church two weeks ago. So, no, this isn't about collective probabilities - this is about what you personally do. In any case, Elon Musk doesn't speak for individual behavior, he controls a company of thousands of employees. That's already collective behavior.
    - spiderfarmer 7y ago
      Now, with this many asterisks, is it really a good and valid comparison?
tomerico 7y ago
It's an odd comparison for sure. Italy has the highest car deaths rate in the EU, with 3,378 deaths in 2017. The Coronavirus has caused 2,177 deaths in just a couple of weeks. With that said, the real comparison is the Flu that had 24,981 deaths in the 2016/17 season.
- spiderfarmer 7y ago
  No, that’s not a real comparison, because we did everything we could to contain the virus. If left unchecked, the virus would probably have killed hundreds of thousands by now.
  - ygra 7y ago
    The measures taken have a delay until you notice their effect. Since we only see confirmed cases (delayed by the incubation period and probably mostly those who show severe symptoms) and deaths (delayed further by the time it takes to die) there's a lot of people out there who don't (yet) show any symptoms but can still infect others. With the lockdown measures in places we should see an effect in reduced confirmed cases in the next few days, hopefully.
cma 7y ago
Plus the main risk is to their families, so appealing to their drive home is kind of twisted. Plus, one defector company when all the others shut down and stop the spread gets a huge advantage, by passing on externalities to all the rest, so it is a selfish move as well.
smacktoward 7y ago
It's almost like Elon Musk is the sort of person who shoots their mouth off without thinking too much first.
manicdee 7y ago
He’s comparing mortality rates per capita. Consider that cars are an endemic condition with a vast amount of time and money spent keeping people safe while using them or being near them. If similar resources are deployed to protect people from C19, there will be far fewer deaths from that than cars. At work the simple precautions are to wash your hands, hold meetings by phone, by email or not at all, and avoid socialising with people you are not directly working with. Wash your hands, wash your work surfaces. They key here is limiting the spread of the disease while the health system ramps up support. There is no need to go into wild-eyed panic and insist that we shut cities down. Doing so would cause far more problems (and fatalities) than COVID-19 ever will.
xiphias2 7y ago
He should. But he should look at Italy. Today more people died from COVID than from car accidents (more than 300 vs probably less than 300 based on statistics). US is just 2 weeks from that.

vsareto 7y ago

The media goes back and forth like this all the time. I'm not surprised people are following by example, but it is disappointing. See: largest DJIA absolute point loss/gain headlines throughout the years.

Slimbo 7y ago

Also, the logical conclusion of that argument is we should do more about vehicle accidents, not ignore Covid-19!

manicdee 7y ago
No, the logical conclusion is that we take simple precautions every time we get in a car (which is an endemic disease), which is what keeps the fatality rate low, and we can take simple precautions to keep a pandemic from killing people. Cars are in what … top three or so causes of death alongside heart disease and cancer? Deaths from COVID-19 is the USA are only going to beat that number if the government truly screws the pooch in terms of testing, treatment and management. Wash your hands.
- zelon88 7y ago
  Define what you mean by "screw the pooch." Currently COVID-19 response is a finely tuned balance of economic impact to death-toll. React too early and you'll experience an unacceptable economic impact. React too late and you'll experience an unacceptable death-toll. The reason this situation is so dire is not because of the lethality of the virus. It is because our medical infrastructure is not capable of treating patients in the capacity that this virus can infect them. The goal is not to prevent people from contracting COVID-19. The goal is to slow the spread of COVID-19 so that the number of cases which require hospitalization stays lower than the availability of hospital beds. If everyone got sick all at once the fatality rate would increase because people would be dying faster than they could be treated. So long as we can treat our ill faster than people become ill we can manage this situation even if 100% of humans eventually become infected. The balancing act comes into play when you also need to consider the impact to the economy. There is a saturation point that early responding countries will reach where even if they continue to increase their response they will only be increasing their economic impact without significantly decreasing the death-toll. Finding this balance is what governments are trying to do right now.

arrrg 7y ago

The risk is also not so much to individuals (well, indirectly) but rather to the healthcare system collapsing. Seems logical, though, that someone as self-centered and egomaniacal as Musk thinks of individual risk.

Tiktaalik 7y ago

lol at a car company ceo highlighting how dangerous cars are. Hmm! Maybe we should stop doubling down on automobile oriented infrastructure and rely on something safer instead.

londons_explore 7y ago

I think it's a 100% legit comparison to make, as long as you say "but, if these numbers change (and many experts believe they will), we will update this advice".

spiderfarmer 7y ago
Explain to me how this comparison makes sense.
- londons_explore 7y ago
  Tomorrow, my chance of dying from COVID-19 is lower than my chance of dying in a car crash. In 3 weeks time, those probabilities might have changed. My behaviour today should reflect probabilities today, and my behaviour in 3 weeks should reflect probabilities then. My behaviour today has negligible impact on my chances in 3 weeks too. Collective behaviour might effect collective probabilities in 3 weeks, but even that is relatively minimal considering the nature of exponentials.
  - jjeaff 7y ago
    So, since -my- risk of catching measles is very low... I shouldn't get immunized, right?
  - geofft 7y ago
    Your behavior today has serious and direct impact on not only your chances in three weeks but on the lives of other people around you. A cluster of sick people in South Korea is traced to one person who attended church two weeks ago. So, no, this isn't about collective probabilities - this is about what you personally do. In any case, Elon Musk doesn't speak for individual behavior, he controls a company of thousands of employees. That's already collective behavior.
  - spiderfarmer 7y ago
    Now, with this many asterisks, is it really a good and valid comparison?

tomerico 7y ago

It's an odd comparison for sure. Italy has the highest car deaths rate in the EU, with 3,378 deaths in 2017. The Coronavirus has caused 2,177 deaths in just a couple of weeks. With that said, the real comparison is the Flu that had 24,981 deaths in the 2016/17 season.

spiderfarmer 7y ago
No, that’s not a real comparison, because we did everything we could to contain the virus. If left unchecked, the virus would probably have killed hundreds of thousands by now.
- ygra 7y ago
  The measures taken have a delay until you notice their effect. Since we only see confirmed cases (delayed by the incubation period and probably mostly those who show severe symptoms) and deaths (delayed further by the time it takes to die) there's a lot of people out there who don't (yet) show any symptoms but can still infect others. With the lockdown measures in places we should see an effect in reduced confirmed cases in the next few days, hopefully.

cma 7y ago

Plus the main risk is to their families, so appealing to their drive home is kind of twisted. Plus, one defector company when all the others shut down and stop the spread gets a huge advantage, by passing on externalities to all the rest, so it is a selfish move as well.

smacktoward 7y ago

It's almost like Elon Musk is the sort of person who shoots their mouth off without thinking too much first.

manicdee 7y ago

He’s comparing mortality rates per capita. Consider that cars are an endemic condition with a vast amount of time and money spent keeping people safe while using them or being near them. If similar resources are deployed to protect people from C19, there will be far fewer deaths from that than cars. At work the simple precautions are to wash your hands, hold meetings by phone, by email or not at all, and avoid socialising with people you are not directly working with. Wash your hands, wash your work surfaces. They key here is limiting the spread of the disease while the health system ramps up support. There is no need to go into wild-eyed panic and insist that we shut cities down. Doing so would cause far more problems (and fatalities) than COVID-19 ever will.

xiphias2 7y ago

He should. But he should look at Italy. Today more people died from COVID than from car accidents (more than 300 vs probably less than 300 based on statistics). US is just 2 weeks from that.