Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 22 of 22

Thread: Risk vs perception

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    488
    Quote Originally Posted by NavyDiver View Post
    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.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    3,696
    Quote Originally Posted by BradC View Post
    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 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.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Search AULRO.com ONLY!
Search All the Web!