Contagiousness

"You know where this comes from--shaking hands? It was a way of showing a stranger that you weren't carrying a weapon in the old days. You offered your empty right hand to show you meant no harm."
--Dr Ellis Cheever (Contagion)

The data suggest that most people face more risk of being killed by driving to work or by being struck by lightning than from CV19. According to some people, that doesn't matter because, unlike those other sources of risk, the virus is contagious. Therefore, extreme measures are required to mitigate the risk.

This train of logic is...derailed.

Let's do a couple of things upfront. First, let's define 'contagious' as an illness than can be spread from one person to another from either direct or indirect contact. Second, let's set aside the constitutional issues that such a definition presents to someone who wants to restrict individual freedoms due to the prospects of contagious spread. Among other things, those issues include demonstrating beyond doubt that a person has a communicable illness, that this person will imminently infect others, that an infection, if it occurs, is likely to result in a mortal condition for the recipient.

That burden of proof, btw, rests with the accuser, and must be proven for each individual whose liberties are being threatened. Stated differently, a 'class action' decision that restricts the liberties of a large group of people based on sweeping generalizations about the contagious nature of a virus are invalid.

That's a tall order right there. But let's set the constitutional problems aside for now and ponder the logic--that the contagious nature of CV19 somehow nullifies traditional risk assessment.

An obvious question out of the gate is this: What makes CV19 unique in this regard? We've had contagious diseases before. The seasonal flu is contagious. If the response is that CV19 is more contagious than the seasonal flu, then the question becomes this: At what level of contagion does the need for extraordinary measures kick in? What is the rationale that demonstrates why CV19 defies traditional risk assessment and requires extraordinary measures that weren't necessary previously?

That's a tall order as well.

Finally, consider the construct of contagion itself. In a general sense, contagion can be seen as the spread of something bad or harmful. People are exposed to contagion in this sense every day. When driving, for example, a person could be operating a poorly maintained car (e.g., worn out brakes, under-inflated tires) or distracted while at the wheel (e.g., texting on phone, not concentrating on road) which increases the likelihood that they could 'spread serious injury' to others.

If people routinely assess the risk of contagion on the roads, then why are they incapable of doing so in the case of contagious illness?