4 ms·
If 70% of people get it, you have a baseline risk of 30% of getting it. My assumption is that a sizeable fraction of people either: * Already got it * Don’t
by graeme 7y ago
If 70% of people get it, you have a baseline risk of 30% of getting it.
My assumption is that a sizeable fraction of people either:
* Already got it
* Don’t take hand washing seriously or do it wrong
* Are bad at avoiding touching their face
* Unnecessarily touch surfaces when out (i.e. door with hand, rather than sleeve/bag, whatever)
* Don’t practice distancing well
* Are in a job where they must interact with the public
If you do all of the above correctly, my guess is you can raise your odds of avoiding from 30% to 50-60%.
It’s not based on any math, but I don’t think there’s any definite math to base it on. I could be wrong in either direction.
Nonetheless I think it’s sufficient to argue that it is not inevitable that and individual will get it and everyone should not even bother to avoid it.
- azemetre 7y agoI do nearly everything except distance well if I am forced back to work and have to take public transportation. I live in Boston and this is my fear. I avoid people now but I doubt much people can keep this sustained for 6-months.
- nradov 7y agoObviously current measures aren't sustainable for 6 months, or even 3 months.
- Syntonicles 7y agoI'm trying to understand your numbers and I'm hung up on what may just be a coincidence. You say if 70% of people get it, you have a baseline risk of 30% of getting it. Is that the normal way of phrasing risk? My expectation would be that there is a 30% chance of not getting it. Am I misreading your comment or is my definition of risk somehow backward?
- graeme 7y agoOops. Just a typo. I meant baseline chance of 30% of not getting it. So I figure, with precautions, you have a more than 30% chance of being in that 30%.