The novel coronavirus appears at first to be a problem of risk management.
The problem isn't risk so much as uncertainty.
In 1921, shortly after the 1918 flu pandemic, economist Frank Knight made the distinction between risk and uncertainty.
Among the unknowns about the virus: the true hospitalization and death rates; how infectious it is; how many asymptomatic patients are walking around; how it affects young people; how risk factors vary among different countries with different populations, pollution levels and urban densities.
Testing everyone may not be feasible, but regularly testing a random sample of the population would be informative.
We don't know how reliable tests were in China; studies suggest the false-negative rate there is between 3% and 50%-an enormous range.
If tests aren't reliable, the supposed source of certainty can create even more uncertainty.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/risk-uncertainty-and-coronavirus-11584975787?mod=hp_opin_pos_1
The problem isn't risk so much as uncertainty.
In 1921, shortly after the 1918 flu pandemic, economist Frank Knight made the distinction between risk and uncertainty.
Among the unknowns about the virus: the true hospitalization and death rates; how infectious it is; how many asymptomatic patients are walking around; how it affects young people; how risk factors vary among different countries with different populations, pollution levels and urban densities.
Testing everyone may not be feasible, but regularly testing a random sample of the population would be informative.
We don't know how reliable tests were in China; studies suggest the false-negative rate there is between 3% and 50%-an enormous range.
If tests aren't reliable, the supposed source of certainty can create even more uncertainty.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/risk-uncertainty-and-coronavirus-11584975787?mod=hp_opin_pos_1
No comments:
Post a Comment