Comments on: Is swine flu advice becoming a pigs ear?

By: Jo B-M

Jo B-M — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 13:48:01 +0000

As the Pregnant Wife in question might I put in my tuppeneth ?

Matthew, your point – People really don’t seem to be able to distinguish between “small increase in risk, you might want to bear it in mind” and “massive problem – just don’t do it, you’re likely to die if you do” is exactly the problem.

For the last few weeks I, as a pregnant woman have been told by the media that I am at ‘greater risk’ – meaningless. I’m not inumerate and I’ve carried out my fair share of risk assessments so I know how to assess a risk situation.

Define Greater and define Risk – as you say, if I get on the train do I need to bear in mind a slight increase in susceptibility to a mild dose of flu or, if I get on the train am I subjecting myself and my unborn child to a high risk of a horrible death/permanent brain damage ? I’m sure neither is the case but surely it is not beyond the wit of health professionals to state on a scale of 1 to 10 – should I work from home (fine) or should a just carry an extra hanky (also fine). Phrases like ‘greater risk’ and ‘underlying health problems’ might sell the news but they do nothing to inform or educate.

And if the answer is ‘we just don’t know enough yet’ isn’t that more helpful than ‘Don’t panic captain Mainwaring’ ?

By: JohnBM

JohnBM — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 12:47:43 +0000

I agree – My issue is that nobody is willing to admit ignorance and say that “we just don’t know yet.”
The recent pregancy muddle highights that if you don’t know, sometimes it’s better to stay schtum.

By: Matthew Huntbach

Matthew Huntbach — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 11:43:32 +0000

The problem is that most people in this country – including almost all journalists it seems – appear to be functionally innumerate. Part of this innumeracy is an inability to understand risk factors. People really don’t seem to be able to distinguish between “small increase in risk, you might want to bear it in mind” and “massive problem – just don’t do it, you’re likely to die if you do”.

When you say “underlying health problems”, yes, many things increase the risk. But, no, it’s not something that can be written down as exact rules. It sounds vague because it has to be vague – the understanding of the extent to which any of this is a risk IS vague. The problem is that if people are asked to try and quantify it, they’d be lying if they said “no risk”. There are so many variables which will only become more clear as this thing works out and gives us more data.