3 ms·
Depends on what you consider reasonable. Per this study [0] NYC had, as of June 2020, about 100 deaths under age 65 from people without comorbidities. During th
by ineedasername 5y ago
Depends on what you consider reasonable. Per this study [0] NYC had, as of June 2020, about 100 deaths under age 65 from people without comorbidities. During the same time period there were about 200,000 cases. This made the chance of a healthy person dying from COVID about 1 in 2000.
Given the option, I'm not taking that bet. I wouldn't play Russian roulette even with a 2000-bullet revolver. Especially when there are pretty simple steps I can take to further minimize the risk.
(It would be nice to have more-- and updated-- data than this. If anyone is aware of a source, I'd love to know about it)
That's also discounting other (and possibly not yet known) complications from getting COVID. There might not be much of any, but we it will be some time before we know that so I wouldn't discount that factor in my risk analysis.
Serious measure to mitigate transmission rates still seems like a very reasonable practice, even for healthy people.
[0] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7327471/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7327471/
- aantix 5y ago>Depends on what you consider reasonable Thank-you for acknowledging the subjectivity of Risk Tolerance.
- ineedasername 5y agoYep, we all draw our own lines on that. The complicating factor with COVID is that acting on your own higher risk tolerance impacts other people too. That's why we've seen such disagreement in society over the types & level of precautions to take. (Apart from when it is just outright politicized for political gain)