Risk, and The Optimism Bias

[Rayne]

I'd recommend watching this video before reading what I've posted. While my post isn't entirely based on this video, I do have a some references that may be clarified by watching this video. It's also very informative, even if you choose not to read what I've written.

I've always been fascinated with "risk" in general, but there are some things I've come across in my short span of adult life that has been very intriguing (to say the least). For example: you are more likely to be struck by lightning than to be incarcerated for digital piracy. Still afraid to pirate that movie? I've pirated over a terabyte in the last decade, and I have not had a single lawsuit filed against me; but there have been some people who pirated a single album, and were either fined or incarcerated. This is very confusing, to many; and some are furious over this information. Whatever your stance on piracy is, let's keep it out of this topic, as I'm just trying to set up examples for you.

Tali Sharot is the author of The Optimism Bias, and she has found that the average person thinks that they are not average at all. Most people tend to place themselves in an 'above average' category, and are even very happy to take risks because they do not believe they are actually going to suffer any consequences. I have a feeling that many people in my generation are probably more aware of actual statistics for various risks, as we grew up in a 'scientific' world that tried to scare us into behaving; but I think the majority of my generation is probably delusional enough to think that they are either a) above the statistics, or think that the statistics do not apply to them. While it is true that many people are incarcerated under drink drive laws, it is also true that the odds are in your favour when you leave a bar with an illegal blood/alcohol level (of course, there are many factors, but bear with me on this). It is also true that, if you are only having intercourse with an infected person once, your likelihood of contracting a sexually transmitted disease is very low; this especially goes for viruses like HIV/AIDS, gonorrhoea, syphilis, and even HPV (depending on the strain). Oddly enough, the chance of pregnancy for M/F sex is around 1:100 courses of unprotected sex; compared to getting any other STD, this is the most likely thing that could happen with straight/bisexual couples (aside from herpes). So, what am I getting at?

Well, when you think about risk, in general, most people do not tend to think about the risk they take on a day-to-day basis. As I've pointed out in other threads, you run a risk walking by a major road with cars. You also run a risk of injury, or death, from flying; and even taking the bus. What Michael (aka Vsauce) mentions is that most people are pretty much willing to ignore the risks involved in an activity when they feel like they are in control. One great example I have used, as well as other members here, is riding a motorbike. Riding a motorbike through rush hour traffic may be much more dangerous than driving a car in identical conditions, as you're not as likely to be seen, even if the rider does everything possible to minimise his/her risk; however, the risk of an accident in a car isn't as low as many people are typically going to assume (risk of a car accident in your lifetime is 1:84, source- http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/31/how-scared-should-we-be/). According to the same source for car accident risk, your risk of heart disease is 1:5, cancer is 1:7, and stroke is 1:24. Now, according to some statisticians, riding a motorbike makes your risk go up by 16x compared to a car, which would be 1:5; this is the same as the risk for heart disease. Now, considering all of this, heart disease is 20x more likely for me than getting a girl pregnant from a single course of unprotected sex; compared to my risk of most STDs, that odd is even more concerning. Then again, you could use this 1:5 statistic of heart disease to trick yourself into thinking that riding a motorbike is a bit safer than it is; as odd as that may sound.

Now, I'm not trying to say that any/all of these statistics are entirely accurate (I'll admit, my research for this post was very minimal), but I wanted to make a generalised point for those who may not take the time to do any research themselves. My point is: whether you want to admit it or not, the risks you take on a daily basis, compared to the risks in your sex life alone, are much more concerning than many of us seem to realise. While you may think that you're healthy, and your diet and exercise regimen are enough to keep you healthy, you still run a risk of cancer or stroke. The media, many doctors, and even schools, have made many forms of risky activities appear much more dangerous than they really are; and what's worse is that we're not properly educated on risk with our daily activities, and what could kill us in our daily routine. A fun example for risk could be the "fake" apple iPod/iPhone chargers that were being sold on eBay. These chargers were cheaply produced knock-off chargers, and they actually obtained a reputation for shocking/electrocuting people. While many people didn't have this problem, many did. Oddly enough, this hasn't prevented most people from buying these cheap products. This also could be related to other various knock-off products, from cables to phones and even cars (China has plenty of knock-off merchandise across the board).

In a round about way of saying it, I'm really trying to make it clear that the risk we all take, being barebackers, and some of us being drug users, is probably not as extreme as you thought. I'm not trying to give anybody a green light to fuck 24/7, while slamming speed balls and eating the shit of a random guy in the sauna; this is not it, at all. I'm just trying to help some of you relax, and realise that we all face risk, every day, regardless of our sex life. We have no idea when we will die, what from, or even how painful it will be; but, that shouldn't stop us from doing something risky, as long as we enjoy doing it.

On a separate note: I'm going to attempt some work on figuring out the actual risk of death on a daily basis by combining the statistical probabilities of death from the average daily activities (riding a bicycle, driving a car, swimming, flying, etc.). If anyone is interested in helping me work on this little project, please feel free to send me a message.

[mike43]

Insteresting point of view like the video too

[Kebb]

Interesting video, thanks.

Though I'm not sure of the validity of comparing the risk for stroke over a lifetime, with the risk of pregnancy on a single intercourse. Seems to me most women do get pregnant at one point or the other, and sometimes many times

Aside from the numbers, I think there may be a psychological bias also in how we perceive risks we can't do much or anything about (like stroke or nuclear conflict) compared to those we get to decide about taking or not (breeding). And another one in discrete occasions versus more continuous exposure: I may well get cancer from smoking, but I cant say THIS cigarette I'm about to smoke will be the one to start my cancer. But it could be THIS guy I'm about fuck who knocks me.

[Rayne]

Glad you guys liked the video.

Though I'm not sure of the validity of comparing the risk for stroke over a lifetime, with the risk of pregnancy on a single intercourse. Seems to me most women do get pregnant at one point or the other, and sometimes many times

Aside from the numbers, I think there may be a psychological bias also in how we perceive risks we can't do much or anything about (like stroke or nuclear conflict) compared to those we get to decide about taking or not (breeding). And another one in discrete occasions versus more continuous exposure: I may well get cancer from smoking, but I cant say THIS cigarette I'm about to smoke will be the one to start my cancer. But it could be THIS guy I'm about fuck who knocks me.

I only used different statistics to prove a simple point, and I referenced Tali Sharot's The Optimism Bias for pretty much the same psychological reason you mentioned here. She has noticed that people are seemingly hard wired to be optimistic; whether this is the case, no one really knows. What she has noticed is that, using brain scans, people respond differently to good news and bad news that coincide with our perception on risks. One example that I saw on a show (Through The Wormhole) was that a man who was being tested was given various questions about risks. When he heard news that was worse than what he expected, very little brain activity occurred; he was also less likely to change his answer when asked again. Now, when he heard news that was better than his original answer, brain activity spiked, and he would change his answer the second time the question was asked. This is very common with most people, and it suggests that the average person is willing to think they are "above" statistics, one could say.

She has uncovered something similar to what you said, though not entirely. I don't remember everything about her work, so she may/may not have uncovered something very similar to what you've said (people are psychologically biased with risks they have little control over).

Here's a TED Talk she did about her work, for those who are interested. I'm currently in the middle of something, so I'll be happy to expand on this video, or anything else I may have been a bit too vague to clarify later. I hate to not be direct, but I figured I'd share something while I was still on the forum. I should at least get points for trying

[Guest JizzDumpWI]

Thanks Rayne, a pair of posts (with video) that I found interesting - thought provoking.

The very first thought I had at the beginning of Michael's video was "I want him to fuck me". He is pretty much "my type". But I digress...

I agree with your premise "in a round about way of saying it, I'm really trying to make it clear that the risk we all take, being barebackers, and some of us being drug users, is probably not as extreme as you thought. I'm not trying to give anybody a green light to fuck 24/7, while slamming speed balls and eating the shit of a random guy in the sauna; this is not it, at all. I'm just trying to help some of you relax, and realise that we all face risk, every day, regardless of our sex life. We have no idea when we will die, what from, or even how painful it will be; but, that shouldn't stop us from doing something risky, as long as we enjoy doing it."

I would want to add to this though that while I hope we don't stop doing things with a skewed perception of risk as long as we enjoy doing it; it makes equally much sense to use reasonable precautions if they are available, and don't alter the enjoyable activity. This is why I believe PrEP is such a helpful offering. The anonymous load I took last night, had I not been on PrEP, likely would not have any bad consequence. But I might have contracted an STI. What I know though is that I did NOT contract HIV because of my PrEP regimen; and that in my next checkup six weeks from not, if I now have an STI; we'll treat it. If the opportunity presents itself, I hope I will enjoy more sex in the next six weeks, and I won't be obsessing even a little that maybe I have an STI on board now. (a clear example of the optimistic bias). We can drive ourselves crazy worrying every detail; and miss the pleasure (sexual and otherwise) of living. I think Rayne that is your point.

[Rayne]

You're welcome, mate, always a pleasure to share something interesting with others.

I think you managed to understand my point, and I'm glad you can agree with me to an extent. I do advocate the use of taking measures to prevent certain risks, like the use of PrEP in our case, so it isn't like I'm trying to tell everyone to just wing it; that would be more along the lines of irresponsible and stupid. I just want people to understand what the real risks are when put into perspective. Sure, you could suffer some issues with herpes or HPV; but this is fairly harmless compared to death, especially when treatment is available for those who get tested regularly. While HIV isn't harmless, it is something that shouldn't be feared as a death sentence either. I have a fairly risky lifestyle: I smoke; when I do drink, I drink in excess; I do not take PrEP, and always fuck bareback with both sexes (I cannot afford medications on my own, and I'm also okay with the possibility of contracting an STD/HIV given my situation, even if it isn't ideal); and I ride a motorbike, usually at high speeds. While it isn't the most risky lifestyle, it is far from the safest. Then again, I'm willing to take these risks as I'm willing to accept the possible outcomes if the worst should happen. If the worst does happen, I enjoyed my life; and, I won't have any regrets.

I think too many people avoid accepting the possible/likely outcomes, and it's kind of disheartening to me; I think everyone should act on what they feel is worth the risk, not what they think they can get away with. For those who aren't willing to accept the risks, and are going to have anxiety because of a risk they take, they should take it as a learning experience and NOT do it again... but statistics show that likely will not happen, so I can only try to help them calm down. There are some that enjoy taking a risk, and seeing if they manage to get away with it; and while I find that stupid, I won't hold it against them.

Humans are probably the strangest species as it is, so the least we can do is try to enjoy things without worrying so damned much. If we stop worrying, at least we can enjoy being weird- right?

[scottyboy]

very interesting m8, thank you

[JXC]

sorry, I'm driving over the speed limit right now while on cocaine and sitting on the bare cock of a complete stranger, what were we saying about risk taking