Probably not. And for good reason. The average person is not at the same risk to spread the disease. If you only see ten people a day you are a much lower risk to spread the disease than if you see one hundred people a day.
Does frequency really make a difference in terms of vulnerability?
Patients are exposed by just being there overnight and visitors often make frequent visits.
Does frequency really make a difference in terms of vulnerability?
Patients are exposed by just being there overnight and visitors often make frequent visits.
Gentlemen, gentlemen! To your corners, please!He also has the reasoning backwards. He is thinking that we want waiters to get vaccinated for their protection. Though that is part of it, it is far more important to get waiters vaccinated for the protection of others. If one is vaccinated the odds of being a "superspreader" are greatly reduced. An unvaccinated waiter could easily become a superspreader.
I'm not seeing any fundamental difference, here. Vaccination protects both the vaccinatee and her contacts. It's all of a piece.
You seem to be advocating the same thing from different perspectives; attacking the same enemy, with the same weaponry, from different directions.