4 ms·

Preparing for the worst and mitigating risk != being terrified

by awb 5y ago

WaitWaitWha 5y ago
I thought this for a long long time too. I have come to realize I was wrong. If we humans always prepare for the worse, then indeed we will always be terrified. There is no way for us (I know for me) to decouple the nightmarish scenarios I ingested and prepared for, from my emotions. I want to be Spock [0], but I am not. I cannot be on the edge 24/7. I did that for decades (for work & life), it kills me and everyone around me. There is no way to enjoy this great world we live in. So, what do I do? I try to find a "good enough" preparedness for me personally, and my family. Where is that "good enough" for me? It is just a touch more than the average preparedness. I do not have a bomb shelter, but I do have a "breakdown box" in my vehicles; I do not have hidden caches of food, ammo, household needs, but I have a well stacked pantry; and, so on. [^0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spock https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spock
t-writescode 5y ago
That depends on the level of preparation and the steps taken to mitigate risk. Further, sometimes those levels of preparation and mitigation are actually more harmful than the danger itself.
- awb 5y ago
  That’s true. It’s a cost/benefit, risk/reward calculation that everyone needs to make.
  - tptacek 5y ago
    The subtext on all these discussions is generally mandates, so we're talking about a risk/reward calculation made on our behalf, not by us individually.
    - awb 5y ago
      Yeah societies have to continually make decisions for the benefit of the group that affect the individual. Taxes, military, traffic laws, etc.
RobertMiller 5y ago
So were you going through life wearing a mask to mitigate the risk of a deadly flu in 2018 and before? I think probably not, but if your priority is risk mitigation, shouldn't you have been? Risk mitigation is not my priority. If it were, I'd never ride my bike again, even with my helmet. I'd never go kayaking, or rock climbing. I wouldn't swim in lakes, and you'd never catch me in the ocean. If I were preparing for the worst, I'd go everywhere with a tourniquet in my back pocket, keep a few thousand dollars cash in my shoe, and get myself vaccinated for rabies right now. I have no intent to do any of these things, because such fretting every possibility is no way to live.
- awb 5y ago
  > So were you going through life wearing a mask to mitigate the risk of a deadly flu in 2018 and before? I think probably not, but if your priority is risk mitigation, shouldn't you have been? No because those flu viruses were not novel, or as deadly. When there is a large degree of uncertainty (like a deadly novel virus), I personally tend towards caution and am fine being too cautious rather than not cautious enough. If you don’t, that’s fine and that’s your choice. The lifestyle examples you give are too simplistic. I’m willing to bet you’re willing to ride your bike on some roads and not others, or swim at some beaches in some weather conditions and not others. To act like you never assess the situation or act in a way that mitigates your risk is absurd. I bet you wear a seatbelt on occasion and look both ways when crossing the road. Those are risk mitigation techniques.
  - RobertMiller 5y ago
    > No because those flu viruses were not novel, or as deadly. That information always lags reality. When/if the next deadly flu strain emerges, it will have emerged before it is discovered to have emerged. If you're not planning for this scenario, are you really planning for the worst case? You could be Patient Zero for Spanish Flu Part Two, with your preemptive masking being the difference between global disaster and nothingburger.
    - awb 5y ago

Preparing for the worst and mitigating risk != being terrified

by awb 5y ago

Preparing for the worst and mitigating risk != being terrified

I thought this for a long long time too. I have come to realize I was wrong. If we humans always prepare for the worse, then indeed we will always be terrified. There is no way for us (I know for me) to decouple the nightmarish scenarios I ingested and prepared for, from my emotions. I want to be Spock [0], but I am not. I cannot be on the edge 24/7. I did that for decades (for work & life), it kills me and everyone around me. There is no way to enjoy this great world we live in. So, what do I do? I try to find a "good enough" preparedness for me personally, and my family. Where is that "good enough" for me? It is just a touch more than the average preparedness. I do not have a bomb shelter, but I do have a "breakdown box" in my vehicles; I do not have hidden caches of food, ammo, household needs, but I have a well stacked pantry; and, so on. [^0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spock https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spock

t-writescode 5y ago

That depends on the level of preparation and the steps taken to mitigate risk. Further, sometimes those levels of preparation and mitigation are actually more harmful than the danger itself.

awb 5y ago
That’s true. It’s a cost/benefit, risk/reward calculation that everyone needs to make.
- tptacek 5y ago
  The subtext on all these discussions is generally mandates, so we're talking about a risk/reward calculation made on our behalf, not by us individually.
  - awb 5y ago
    Yeah societies have to continually make decisions for the benefit of the group that affect the individual. Taxes, military, traffic laws, etc.

RobertMiller 5y ago

So were you going through life wearing a mask to mitigate the risk of a deadly flu in 2018 and before? I think probably not, but if your priority is risk mitigation, shouldn't you have been? Risk mitigation is not my priority. If it were, I'd never ride my bike again, even with my helmet. I'd never go kayaking, or rock climbing. I wouldn't swim in lakes, and you'd never catch me in the ocean. If I were preparing for the worst, I'd go everywhere with a tourniquet in my back pocket, keep a few thousand dollars cash in my shoe, and get myself vaccinated for rabies right now. I have no intent to do any of these things, because such fretting every possibility is no way to live.

awb 5y ago
> So were you going through life wearing a mask to mitigate the risk of a deadly flu in 2018 and before? I think probably not, but if your priority is risk mitigation, shouldn't you have been? No because those flu viruses were not novel, or as deadly. When there is a large degree of uncertainty (like a deadly novel virus), I personally tend towards caution and am fine being too cautious rather than not cautious enough. If you don’t, that’s fine and that’s your choice. The lifestyle examples you give are too simplistic. I’m willing to bet you’re willing to ride your bike on some roads and not others, or swim at some beaches in some weather conditions and not others. To act like you never assess the situation or act in a way that mitigates your risk is absurd. I bet you wear a seatbelt on occasion and look both ways when crossing the road. Those are risk mitigation techniques.
- RobertMiller 5y ago
  > No because those flu viruses were not novel, or as deadly. That information always lags reality. When/if the next deadly flu strain emerges, it will have emerged before it is discovered to have emerged. If you're not planning for this scenario, are you really planning for the worst case? You could be Patient Zero for Spanish Flu Part Two, with your preemptive masking being the difference between global disaster and nothingburger.
  - awb 5y ago