It sounds like a lot to me if I imagine going grocery shopping regularly, because ‘grocery shopping’ isn’t where I want to spend a large chunk of my risk budget. Suppose that:
My goal is to have at most a 1% risk of catching COVID per year.
Every grocery visit costs me 70 microcovids, rather than this being an especially risky time. (Note that this assumption is false.)
I go grocery shopping once per week.
Then over a year, I’ve spent ~3600 microcovids out of a ~10,000 microcovid budget. If I can cut out a third of my risk for the year, that gives me a lot more room to travel, see friends, respond to emergencies, etc.
Thanks and I was not thinking of the cumulative/trade off value of the assessment. While I’m sure your “over a year” time period was purely illustrative, I would wonder about just what time interval one might want to apply for this type of budgeting approach for consuming your mCs.
For instances, it seems more reasonable (to me) to say “I want to limit my maximum risk of infection to 1%”. Then over some period of time I can sum up the mCs and make sure I keep that under the 10,000 budget defined. Over time then the early spend gets put back in the budget.
Also, if you live alone and don’t have any set agreements with anyone else, then the “budgeting” lens is sort of just a useful tool to guide thinking. Absent pod agreements, as an individual decisionmaker, you should just spend uCoV when it’s worth the tradeoff, and not when it’s not.
You could think about it as an “annualized” risk, more than an “annual” risk; more like “192 points per week, in a typical week, on average” and it kind of amortizes out, and less like “you have 10k and once you spend it you’re done”
I’m wondering why you find a 70 in a million chance of getting infected as “quite a bit”? Or am I completely misunderstanding the microCOVID?
It sounds like a lot to me if I imagine going grocery shopping regularly, because ‘grocery shopping’ isn’t where I want to spend a large chunk of my risk budget. Suppose that:
My goal is to have at most a 1% risk of catching COVID per year.
Every grocery visit costs me 70 microcovids, rather than this being an especially risky time. (Note that this assumption is false.)
I go grocery shopping once per week.
Then over a year, I’ve spent ~3600 microcovids out of a ~10,000 microcovid budget. If I can cut out a third of my risk for the year, that gives me a lot more room to travel, see friends, respond to emergencies, etc.
Thanks and I was not thinking of the cumulative/trade off value of the assessment. While I’m sure your “over a year” time period was purely illustrative, I would wonder about just what time interval one might want to apply for this type of budgeting approach for consuming your mCs.
For instances, it seems more reasonable (to me) to say “I want to limit my maximum risk of infection to 1%”. Then over some period of time I can sum up the mCs and make sure I keep that under the 10,000 budget defined. Over time then the early spend gets put back in the budget.
Any thoughts on that?
Also, if you live alone and don’t have any set agreements with anyone else, then the “budgeting” lens is sort of just a useful tool to guide thinking. Absent pod agreements, as an individual decisionmaker, you should just spend uCoV when it’s worth the tradeoff, and not when it’s not.
You could think about it as an “annualized” risk, more than an “annual” risk; more like “192 points per week, in a typical week, on average” and it kind of amortizes out, and less like “you have 10k and once you spend it you’re done”