Can this help some understand the measures?

quote:

---

Precautionary decisions do not scale. Collective safety may require excessive individual risk avoidance, even if it con?icts with an individual’s own interests and bene?ts. It may require an individual to worry about risks that are comparatively insigni?cant.

Assume a risk of a multiplicative viral epidemic, still in its early stages. The risk for an individual to catch the virus is very low, lower than other ailments. It is therefore "irrational" to panic (react immediately and as a priority). But if she or he does not panic and act in an ultra-conservative manner, they will contribute to the spread of the virus and it will become a severe source of systemic harm

This happens when the systemic risk is small to the individual but common to all, while an individual’s other idiosyncratic risks dominate her or his own life. The risk of car accident may be greater for an individual, but smaller for society.

Under such conditions it becomes sel?sh, even psychopathic, to act according to what is called "rational" behavior – to make one’s own immediate rankings of risk con?ict with those of society, even generate risks for society. This is similar to other tragedies of the common, except that there is life and death.

In addition, there is a tradeoff short-term vs. long term for idiosyncratic risk. Over the long run, there is convergence between idiosyncratic and systemic:
your risk rises if all others are infected and the risks of survival from other diseases drop.

For instance, during a pandemic that mostly spares young, healthy individuals, an independent emer-
gency that would typically be routine may become untreatable because of lack of resources. Further, in conditions of severe societal breakdown, many
additional risks will emerge for all agents that can’t be reduced to the initial short term risk of infection
to the individual

---