My father, who used to testify at various hearings (he was a physicist) used to make this argument. I think it kind of misses a key point: People would much rat

My father, who used to testify at various hearings (he was a physicist) used to make this argument. I think it kind of misses a key point: People would much rather deal with N deaths a year than deal with a range with an average of N - k, but a much, much higher possible number (thicker tail to the distribution). Just because math says it's better doesn't mean that is how people experience the risk.