|
Re: Coronavirus
It's very easy to be absolutist about this whole issue. The whole argument about how locked down we are and where we are going in the short and longer term is all about management of risk. The level of risk associated with different activities is very much a science question and that still isn't 100% clear. We are learning all the time and taking lessons from previous diseases. It's all about balances of probabilities.
Once we have an idea of risk, then we get to the social sciences and risk management. This is either a personal choice or one decided for us by governments. Some times these are in conflict, we have all seen people driving without seat belts or using phones. The government says that is risky, but humans decide otherwise and here we are.
It's quite clear in this forum that the perceived risk is different from person to person. How much risk of contracting COVID are you willing to take? Would dropping the risk by 50% work, 90% or 100%?
I think the government has done a reasonable job so far at advising us on the risk. They have maybe been not so good at their own risk mitigation, especially in terms of timeliness (lockdown, PPE procurement, test procurement for example)
|