Quote:
Originally Posted by LI-Camper
.... Comparing this pandemic to driving a car is ridiculous. .....
|
Of course that is not what I said. I compared my work place to driving home.
The company policy was to show the risk for workers was two orders of magnitude safer than required by regulations. My team provided numerical risk assessments based on science to regulators to show compliance with federal law.
What you did was answer my question with a question. You did not tell what you mean by 'safe'. It is just a vague word the way you use it.
I will answer your question but do not expect you to answer. This for other people.
I agree with the standard for the company. When I look at risk, I first look at the benefit of something. Food stores are a large benefit. Casinos not so much. Then I would look at the risk of health workers dying if exposed (0.2%).
Then the team of experts would identity ways to mitigate the risk such as using PPE.
Not to hard but are you willing to pay the cost?
Of course not. You would be homeless and standing in line at a soup kitchen for beans and rice.
I can protect workers at a nuclear power plant at reasonable cost but I can not protect you from a virus to the same standard.
It is simple science. There is a background level for a virus that will you. Background radiation will not kill you. A million times more radiation will.
You have to consider the cost of poverty. I have done volunteer work in a homeless shelter. It is not good.
I can put you a bubble suit 24/7. Then all you have to worry about is food poisoning, dehydration, suffocation.
Are you getting the point about being 'safe'? If it is not one thing it is another.
:banghead :
Linear Mode
