3 ms·
> Because when the cost is essentially zero it's okay to be a little overzealous with our prevention efforts. We can impose all sort of inconveniences on socie
by umvi 6y ago
> Because when the cost is essentially zero it's okay to be a little overzealous with our prevention efforts.
We can impose all sort of inconveniences on society in the name of saving lives. Why not just wear masks 24/7/365 since it's "free"? Think of all the public health issues that would solve.
I for one am sick of having foggy glasses any time I'm inside a store.
- rootusrootus 6y agoWhat is your threshold of acceptable mortality before you will accept nonzero inconvenience?
- umvi 6y ago1% mortality rate is my threshold. Anything less isn't worth halting society over. To be clear, I think people that are sick should wear masks no matter what. That's just common courtesy for people around you.
- beervirus 6y agoWe were talking about masks, not halting society.
- rootusrootus 6y ago> I think people that are sick should wear masks no matter what. That would seem to be a conundrum, since you said earlier that you think there may be a 1/3 asymptomatic rate.
- pintxo 6y agoThanks for explaining the reasoning behind the mask order. Sick people (according to your own words about 1/3 of them) may not know That they are sick. So if the sick should wear masks this can only be ensured if everyone wears a mask.