3 ms·
It seems like an acceptable level of risk to me as well. But is it an acceptable level to all the people you counteract with say within a week? Is the cashier
by Jommi 6y ago
It seems like an acceptable level of risk to me as well.
But is it an acceptable level to all the people you counteract with say within a week?
Is the cashier at your supermarket, that lives with their 6+ family members, ok with you doing this?
Is your elderly neighbour that also uses your elevator OK with this?
This is the moral and societal conundrum we are in.
- Swizec 6y agoWell I’m not out there licking their face. Isn’t distancing, the plexiglass screens, and mask wearing supposed to fix my risk to others? If memory serves, the probability of transmission is under 1% with those measures.
- Jommi 6y agoIts supposed to reduce it, but we don't know how much. We also don't know how well those standards are adhered to. Could you link the study that backs the 1%? How is that statement better than just coming up with a number?
- Swizec 6y agoHere’s the best I can find. The 1.5% comes from a viral image of why masks are important. CDC says the numbers “show the right idea” but we don’t yet have studies that yield a specific percentage. https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/health/coronavirus/verify-viral-image-about-masks-gets-the-numbers-wrong-but-the-idea-right/507-ff915e39-5a79-483d-86b7-98ecc796c8e5 https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/health/coronavirus/verify...
- vharuck 6y agoFor the sake of an example, allow me to assume (a) there are 10 people in your class, (b) each of you has an average of one other "risky outing" (shop at a store, one meeting with coworkers, visit another household) a day, and (c) each outing has a 0.5% risk of transmission assuming the boxer's infected. If anyone in your group gets infected, there's a good chance you'll all catch it (you seem to acknowledge this). In that case, in one day of infectiousness, there's a 0.995^10 = 95.111% chance nobody else gets infected. So a 4.889% chance of infecting. That's low. But if you all remain infectious for 14 days, there's now only a (0.995^10)^14 = 49.571% chance nobody new is infected. So the odds are your group spread it to at least one other person. And this process will probably repeat through those new infections. Obviously, these numbers are arbitrary. It's a terrible model for an infectious disease. My point is to show how probability is very hard to reason about. It's unrealistic to expect average citizens to do this.
- Jommi 6y agoThanks for putting this thought experiment into numbers, even if they are arbitrary. It really helps to form some estimation of a mental model, and shows how goddamn complex all of this is.
- VLM 6y agoFor some, its very easy to get consent of all the people they interact with in a week. I have no supermarket cashier to request consent of; amazon fresh contactless delivery. I live a pretty wealthy lifestyle away from the coasts, no shared elevators here.