Skip to content

Letter: Simplest explanation usually the best

Re: “Too much social distancing”, Page 32, June 2 Albertan.

Doug Collie (commentary’s writer) talks about how shocked he was at watching an “older guy” try to keep a greater than expected social distance, and implies it was likely due to racism.

Lets not make a mountain out of a molehill. The simplest explanation is usually the best one.

Maybe the older guy was better educated on the subject of COVID than Collie was, and knew the six foot rule is the absolute minimum that you should stay away from someone. The greater the distance, the greater the safety. Ten feet is optimal.

Six feet won’t save you from an uncovered sneeze in your direction. Maybe he knew that roughly 33.3 per cent of people over 80 who catch it die. Compared to those under 60, who have a 0.5 per cent chance of dying, if they catch it, and those under 40, have a 0.2 per cent chance of dying.

Perhaps he had also read the only study on a complete population of young healthy people, on the U.S. aircraft carrier, which found that 60 per cent of young healthy people never develop symptoms.

So if you are over 80, and have a 33 per cent chance of dying from COVID if you catch it and you see people ahead of you, who likely wouldn’t know if they had COVID, would you increase your social distancing, or would you take the 33 per cent chance of dying, if the people ahead have the virus?

According to government websites, in Quebec, 33.7 per cent of those over 80 who caught COVID died, in Alberta, 31.6 per cent.

I think Collie needs to think more about seniors' lives, rather than working so hard to make this a case of social injustice.

Bob Wilson,