> From: Noelle <http://dummy.us.eu.org/noelleg> > Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2020 08:07:42 -0700 (PDT) > > but not peer-reviewed > > https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/06/22/whats-your-risk-from-coronavirus-new-study-suggests-lower-than-we-perceive/ I am with the critic of the study: in this case, it's not sufficient to assume random interactions because the outcome is death, which is a much higher price than most illnesses. (I'm not sure if this simulation compares with the same simulation of the seasonal flu. This would be the right thing to do and would show what the true risk is.)