Post B6fA3OHafaKnltXktk by augieray@mastodon.social
 (DIR) More posts by augieray@mastodon.social
 (DIR) Post #B6fA3Ncp79izjSTCM4 by augieray@mastodon.social
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       I'm still #COVID19 cautious, but we need to discuss the cognitive biases that cause some to inflate risks. Probability Neglect describes our tendency to fixate on the outcome of a scenario rather than the probability of it happening.Today, people say, "Just one COVID infection can kill or disable you." That's true, but so can one accident during a drive or one stumble during a hike.Today, the risks of COVID infection are lower than they've been in five years. Be careful, not fearful.
       
 (DIR) Post #B6fA3OHafaKnltXktk by augieray@mastodon.social
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @themaskerscomic Your reply is an example of the cognitive bias I referenced! The examples I used—driving  or taking a hike—don't require one to sign off on risks. Even your assessment of risks is inflated—one has a 1 in 5 risk of LC IF INFECTED, not because stepped into a grocery store.Everything has risk. We go through life aware & cautious about risks--wearing seatbelts, for example--but we don't post about those risks, promote them daily to others, or let them stop us from living life. 1/2
       
 (DIR) Post #B6fA3OVlorg2TsB504 by augieray@mastodon.social
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @themaskerscomic None of which is to suggest you need to change your choices.  Your choices are your own. But if someone screamed how you can die from a single car accident every single day on social media, you wouldn't find that helpful, correct, or sane.My point is that we need a better discussion of risks with COVID now. We're no longer facing the sorts of risks we did--COVID activity is minimal, and many have some immunity. Talking about COVID in 2026 like we did in 2021 is unhelpful. 2/2
       
 (DIR) Post #B6fA3OlMss9bGFTXJQ by PacificNic@zeroes.ca
       0 likes, 1 repeats
       
       @augieray Your choices are not just your own, though. With COVID, there are external, downstream consequences to your choices. You could be the person who kills an immunocompromised person because you made a "personal risk assessment" that ignores THEIR risk. If the initial chain of transmission had been stopped because that person wore an N95, millions more people would be alive today. A SINGLE transmission chain can have dramatic consequences, and your position ignores that.Maybe wastewater numbers are low. I don't have the same degree of faith in health authorities as you do, I guess, but if there IS a lull, regularly advocating for people to quit masking or lessening precautions "temporarily" is a great way to ensure it only remains a lull temporarily. I hope you think about what your advocacy for reduced precautions during lulls means for immunocompromised/disabled people and their families. @themaskerscomic