Risk vs perception

[NavyDiver]

Riding a horse, Bike or motor bike, Flying in a plane or a glider perhaps a hang glider or a parachute?

Coronavirus ‘Hits All the Hot Buttons’ for How We Misjudge Risk


Psychologists say that differing responses to coronavirus and the flu illustrate our shortcomings when it comes to evaluating danger.

It strikes me people a just scared of what they don't know about. There is currently almost no risk of COVID-19 biting anyone here in Australia. I know for a fact of fair loads of flu cases here which does kill a lot of people is here early but that not news. [bighmmm]

[V8Ian]

The last time I checked, 2% of those who contracted the virus, actually died from it. Apart from being a new human virus, it's no more dangerous than any 'flu that's floating around already. Quoting numbers of those who have succumbed to the virus in China, has to be related to the number who have contracted it, and survived.

[JDNSW]

Yes, although one of the major reasons this new virus is feared is that there are a lot of unknowns about it. Among these are its mode of transmission - it is thought to be transmitted primarily by traces left on smooth surfaces - or maybe by airborne droplets. Another unknown is the reliability of the data on its occurrence in China. In a closed such as this, you never know whether you can trust the data provided.

And certainly, it may be "no more dangerous than any 'flu that's floating around already", but the spectre of 1919 hangs over that statement.

[Hogarthde]

‘The spectre of 1919’
John , did Australia suffer much? I have been involved with restoration of the Quarantine Station on Bruny Island, and the records do not show any death of returning soldiers.
(I reckon they would feel slightly peedoff to see home and not go there)

Am I right in thinking the world death of that flu exceeded the Great War casualty?

By the way John, am in your country for a while, visiting kids in Coombs

hooray Dave

[Johndoe]

You cant compare a virus to a sport.
One you make the choice to do and often has fun associated to it.

Nothing fun about a virus.

Well something like herpes i guess you could argue it was fun getting........

[JDNSW]

‘The spectre of 1919’
John , did Australia suffer much? I have been involved with restoration of the Quarantine Station on Bruny Island, and the records do not show any death of returning soldiers.
(I reckon they would feel slightly peedoff to see home and not go there)

Am I right in thinking the world death of that flu exceeded the Great War casualty?

By the way John, am in your country for a while, visiting kids in Coombs

hooray Dave

In 1919 Australia had a population of about five million. It is estimated that about a third of these contracted the Spanish flu, and 15,000 died from it in one year, including a number of my relatives.

This compares to about 60,000 war deaths over five years. And the profile of those who died was similar to the war dead - most of the deaths were young, healthy adults. Australia's death rate rose by about 25%.

Australia got off lightly compared to some overseas countries, partly because it arrived later (no air travel) and after the news of it, so that quarantine was in place by the time it arrived, and reduced the impact.

This is why we need to be very aware of the possibilities of any new "flu-like" disease.

[Hogarthde]

15,000......that is the population of a decent town.

how come we, I, don’t know this? I understand better now your comment ‘ the spectre of 1919’

where is Corporal Jones when I need him

[JDNSW]

.....

how come we, I, don’t know this? I understand better now your comment ‘ the spectre of 1919’

......

This is perhaps a good example of why we need to learn history. I should point out though that I did not learn about it from any history class. I have known about it nearly all my life, having heard about it from my parents, who were at the end of high school at the time. My mother lost three older sisters, for example, and one of her aunts, who was a nurse.

But I am quite sure that it is very well known in most of the medical profession, and especially among epidemiologists and others charged with quarantine measures. But it is worth pointing out that it seems that many of the quarantine measures imposed at the time were very unpopular, especially the quarantining of soldiers who were being repatriated after years away from home. Some of them died in quarantine stations on Australian soil, especially in the Perth area, as Fremantle was the first port of call.

[rick130]

This is perhaps a good example of why we need to learn history. I should point out though that I did not learn about it from any history class. I have known about it nearly all my life, having heard about it from my parents, who were at the end of high school at the time. My mother lost three older sisters, for example, and one of her aunts, who was a nurse.

But I am quite sure that it is very well known in most of the medical profession, and especially among epidemiologists and others charged with quarantine measures. But it is worth pointing out that it seems that many of the quarantine measures imposed at the time were very unpopular, especially the quarantining of soldiers who were being repatriated after years away from home. Some of them died in quarantine stations on Australian soil, especially in the Perth area, as Fremantle was the first port of call.Interesting, I remember reading about it when I was young, and how devastating it was world wide.

The risk factor with the new Covid 19 virus is that no one has any immunity (yet) yet we all have some influenza immunity, and most nearly all of us carry antibodies to the 1919 Spanish Flu!

[NavyDiver]

Interesting, I remember reading about it when I was young, and how devastating it was world wide.

The risk factor with the new Covid 19 virus is that no one has any immunity (yet) yet we all have some influenza immunity, and most nearly all of us carry antibodies to the 1919 Spanish Flu!


Its still a perception of risk not real such as the twit who rear ended the car beside me 20 minutes ago. I wonder if he realized the risk his phone might break when he ran into the person in front of him while looking at his phone rather than the road

Before you go for a second helping real risk here is Coronary heart disease is the leading underlying cause of death in Australia, followed by dementia and Alzheimer disease, and cerebrovascular disease (which includes stroke). Lung cancer and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) make up the top 5 leading underlying causes of death in Australia in 2017, for males and females of all ages combined.

(https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/life-expectancy-death/deaths-in-australia/contents/leading-causes-of-death)[B]Figure 3.2: Leading underlying causes of death, by age group, 2015–2017

https://www.aihw.gov.au/getmedia/4a50afd8-5df3-46b2-9d4f-7e7ea56c671d/3-2.png.aspx


I understand the many thousands of people who have survived Covid 19 ( 98% or so) are being urgent to donate blood for plasma transfusions at the moment. Idea is sound Coronavirus Live Updates: China exploring new treatment with help from survivors | MEAWW (https://meaww.com/coronavirus-live-updates-china-disease-control-outbreak-wuhan-virus-emergency-hospitals)

Personally I still assume almost zero risk until winter here in the southern hemisphere. Sadly of course the flu mutates every single year meaning most of our prior immunity is no use at all

[rick130]

Its still a perception of risk not real such as the twit who rear ended the car beside me 20 minutes ago. I wonder if he realized the risk his phone might break when he ran into the person in front of him while looking at his phone rather than the road

Before you go for a second helping real risk here is Coronary heart disease is the leading underlying cause of death in Australia, followed by dementia and Alzheimer disease, and cerebrovascular disease (which includes stroke). Lung cancer and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) make up the top 5 leading underlying causes of death in Australia in 2017, for males and females of all ages combined.

(https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/life-expectancy-death/deaths-in-australia/contents/leading-causes-of-death)[B]Figure 3.2: Leading underlying causes of death, by age group, 2015–2017

https://www.aihw.gov.au/getmedia/4a50afd8-5df3-46b2-9d4f-7e7ea56c671d/3-2.png.aspx


I understand the many thousands of people who have survived Covid 19 ( 98% or so) are being urgent to donate blood for plasma transfusions at the moment. Idea is sound Coronavirus Live Updates: China exploring new treatment with help from survivors | MEAWW (https://meaww.com/coronavirus-live-updates-china-disease-control-outbreak-wuhan-virus-emergency-hospitals)

Personally I still assume almost zero risk until winter here in the southern hemisphere. Sadly of course the flu mutates every single year meaning most of our prior immunity is no use at allOf I agree, the risk in this country is tiny, the risk raised by the experts is that of the lack of immunity vs other corona type viruses like the flu and the lack of transparency by the Chinese govt (surprise surprise)

[NavyDiver]

Of I agree, the risk in this country is tiny, the risk raised by the experts is that of the lack of immunity vs other corona type viruses like the flu and the lack of transparency by the Chinese govt (surprise surprise)

Kettle and black issue re transparency would need to be in Current Affairs to comment [biggrin]

The stuff ups with information and access are being dealt with Noted" WHO is looking at WHO is investigating 1,716 health workers in China infected with coronavirus"
(https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/14/who-and-china-investigate-1716-health-workers-infected-with-coronavirus.html)A good point on this is "It appears infections among medical workers peaked in mid-January and have “rapidly” decreased since, according to the World Health Organization."

Reason is being prepared and educated of course.

[JDNSW]

Worth remembering that there are two aspects to risk:-

1. Probability of the event occurring

2. Severity of the event

And we also have to think about what 'event' we are talking about. If we think the risk is that of personal death from COVID19, then yes, the risk for any individual is almost certainly quite low, but the severity high.

If we think about the risk to the Australian population as a whole, there are too many unknowns. The probability of the virus becoming fairly widespread in Australia is unknown, because we have no clear picture of how infectious it is. And we also have no clear picture of the severity, that is how many deaths would be likely from this risk.

But if we think about the economic cost of the virus to Australia, there are fewer unknowns. The probability of it having a substantial economic impact is quite high. Already, it is badly impacting tourism and education, two of Australia's major export earners and jobs providers, and it is starting to affect supply chains in almost every industry. So in this case we know the probability is high, approaching 100%, and although we do not know how bad it is going to get, it is already clear it is going to be bad. If, as is fairly likely, it results in a substantial drop in coal and iron ore sales, it will have a major impact, including the state budgets of WA, Qld and NSW, and the federal budget, with all the flow0n effects of this.

[Eevo]

a lot of wrong information in this thread

[NavyDiver]

How so? Which bits mate?

Cleaning up the cash. https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/east-asia/china-cleans-locks-away-banknotes-to-stop-coronavirus-spread?cx_testId=20&cx_testVariant=cx_1&cx_artPos=3#cxrecs_s

https://www.straitstimes.com/sites/default/files/styles/article_pictrure_780x520_/public/articles/2020/02/15/nz_yuan_150220.jpg?itok=y7j2M9vC&timestamp=1581748097
(https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/east-asia/china-cleans-locks-away-banknotes-to-stop-coronavirus-spread?cx_testId=20&cx_testVariant=cx_1&cx_artPos=3#cxrecs_s)

[p38arover]

Risk V preception

I assume this should read "Risk vs Perception"? [bigwhistle]

It had me confused at first - I didn't know what a Risk 5 meant. :)

[bob10]

From the National museum Australia. defining moments of the influenza pandemic.

The first ship intercepted in Aus. with cases of the flu was the Mataran, intercepted in in Darwin. There were more cases found in Melbourne, but the Victorian Gov. of the time weren't sure if it was Spanish flu, or normal flu, consequently the flu spread to other States, which caused a certain amount of angst. NZ had the Spanish flu before Aus., and Aus. had time to put in place quarantine arrangements to limit its spread. Still, around 15,000 people died, and 40% of the population were infected. Commonwealth serum laboratories were established during the First World War, and they developed their first experimental vaccine in anticipation of the Spanish flu reaching Australia. Maritime quarantine proved effective, and contained the spread of the virus, and restricted its eventual introduction to Australia to a single entry point, Melbourne. More humans died from the Spanish flu [ named after where it was first found] , 50 to 100 million, than were killed in WW1, 18 million, and Australia's 2.7 / 1000 death rate was one of the lowest recorded in the World during the pandemic.

Influenza pandemic | National Museum of Australia (https://www.nma.gov.au/defining-moments/resources/influenza-pandemic)

[NavyDiver]

I assume this should read "Risk vs Perception"? [bigwhistle]

It had me confused at first - I didn't know what a Risk 5 meant. :)


My ability to create typing errors in a real risk not a 'Perception" Edited with thanks

Xièxiè LǎoshīNoted a Doctor we know in Singapore did provide a elevation of real risk in Singapore. That still Leaves us in a very low risk position despite misconceptions. :)

Coronavirus: Why Singapore is so vulnerable to coronavirus spread - BBC News (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-51480613)

[p38arover]

My ability to create typing errors in a real risk not a 'Perception" Edited with thanks


I fixed the displayed thread title, too. :)

[DiscoMick]

I was thinking that face masks are an example of risk Vs perception.
The perception is that you as a healthy person wearing a face mask reduces the risk of you being infected by a sick person.
However, various experts have said that is wrong and the mask does little to prevent inhaling the virus.
It actually goes the opposite way. Wearing a mask may reduce the risk of you as a sick person infecting another person.
In other words, if this is true, masks should be worn by sick people, not healthy people.

[BradC]

That still Leaves us in a very low risk position despite misconceptions.

When you do a risk assessment, you assess the likelihood against the consequence to get your actual risk. Sure, for healthy people the consequence is very likely relatively to extremely low, thus even with a high likelihood the overall risk rating is low. If you (for example) happen to have an immuno-compromised child or aged persons to consider then while the likelihood is still *very* (let's not over state it) low, the consequences are likely to be catastrophic. Looked at in the context of a risk matrix that makes the overall risk actually fairly high.

So when you say *us*, perhaps you mean *you or the other healthy people around you*. There are members of the public who are in a far more fragile state and where an infection (where both the infection vector and potential outcomes are both still relatively unknown) outcome is rated as "potentially terminal". That seriously changes your personal risk assessment. I have both a 4 year old and 94 & 98 year old relations where the docs have stated the chances of surviving exposure as minimal.

Yes, we are lucky in Australia. We are "lucky" because we have a system that acknowledges we live on a relatively isolated island, separated from a lot of the global threats because we monitor them, screen for them and exclude them wherever we can.

That helps, but you need to consider the consequences before you call something "low risk", let alone "very low risk".

As for the thread title, I spend my life trying to educate people of the difference between "perceived risk and real risk". It's always an interesting discussion to have as you work through a risk register. Yes, there is a theoretical risk that a Coyote is going to drop a piano on my head (although he'd have to be a super genius to make it happen). There is also a risk that my child is going to get coughed on in a shopping centre by someone exposed to COVID-19. The likelihood of both threats (perceived and real) is extremely, extremely low. In both cases the consequences are probably fatal. One of them can safely be excluded from the risk register.

As of today's stats, the COVID-19 virus has a 2.4% death rate. Still only 2 outside China. My neighbours brother is in quarantine on the Diamond Princess. Be alert but not alarmed.

Yes, my perspective is well skewed and thankfully very rare. Doesn't make it any less valid.

[NavyDiver]

When you do a risk assessment, you assess the likelihood against the consequence to get your actual risk. Sure, for healthy people the consequence is very likely relatively to extremely low, thus even with a high likelihood the overall risk rating is low. If you (for example) happen to have an immuno-compromised child or aged persons to consider then while the likelihood is still *very* (let's not over state it) low, the consequences are likely to be catastrophic. Looked at in the context of a risk matrix that makes the overall risk actually fairly high.

So when you say *us*, perhaps you mean *you or the other healthy people around you*. There are members of the public who are in a far more fragile state and where an infection (where both the infection vector and potential outcomes are both still relatively unknown) outcome is rated as "potentially terminal". That seriously changes your personal risk assessment. I have both a 4 year old and 94 & 98 year old relations where the docs have stated the chances of surviving exposure as minimal.

Yes, we are lucky in Australia. We are "lucky" because we have a system that acknowledges we live on a relatively isolated island, separated from a lot of the global threats because we monitor them, screen for them and exclude them wherever we can.

That helps, but you need to consider the consequences before you call something "low risk", let alone "very low risk".

As for the thread title, I spend my life trying to educate people of the difference between "perceived risk and real risk". It's always an interesting discussion to have as you work through a risk register. Yes, there is a theoretical risk that a Coyote is going to drop a piano on my head (although he'd have to be a super genius to make it happen). There is also a risk that my child is going to get coughed on in a shopping centre by someone exposed to COVID-19. The likelihood of both threats (perceived and real) is extremely, extremely low. In both cases the consequences are probably fatal. One of them can safely be excluded from the risk register.

As of today's stats, the COVID-19 virus has a 2.4% death rate. Still only 2 outside China. My neighbours brother is in quarantine on the Diamond Princess. Be alert but not alarmed.

Yes, my perspective is well skewed and thankfully very rare. Doesn't make it any less valid.

I meant 'Us" as in Australia or Southern Hemisphere not in the Northern Hemisphere well current known Cold and Flu seasonal fluctuations. Not suggesting for a second there is no risk of even a million $ landing on my head killing me ironically[biggrin] Alert is good - paranoid is perhaps the issue over reactions inflict on everyone. With a few hundred people coming in to my work place coughing every day as occurs for 15 years now happy to stay on the alert but not really worried at all. Re "Diamond Princess" CUK NYSE has a real risk to revenue. Hope of course a vaccine is ready before our cold and flu season.