Alternate truth versus transient risks

Many people must have remember Trump's famous comment about alternate truth. Trump used this to describe his own truth or interpretation of things and events that is different from the truth or what was reported in the news. The truth of the matter is that truth is subjective and anyone can spread his own alternate truth from the truth. There is nothing but the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth is no longer fashionable, only to be used in archaic organisations like the courts of law where truth has a different meaning.

Lately, with the Covid Pandemic, there is a big tussle between more restrictions and lockdowns and opening up the economy. Both are equally damaging to the financial well being of the people. Many countries could not resist the temptation of opening up despite their infected cases still on the rise. It is the in thing, fashionable because clown Trump did it and so far nothing serious has happened in the USA. This nice situation could be helped by not testing too many people and keeping the numbers of infected cases low.

Singapore is also struggling between extending the partial lockdown to opening up. Slowly more businesses are allowed to open and people are starting to get to work.  And with cars so expensive, many poor and not so rich Singaporeans have no choice but to take the Slow MRT to work. And in morning rush hours, the crowded train is still a normal thing.

This puts into conflict the prohibition against social visiting. This is still banned but cramming in trains is ok. When confronted by this kind of questions that is conflicting and contradicting, this is what Lawrence Wong's reply, introducing a new phrase called 'transient risks'. Below is quoted from theindependent.sg.

'Mr Wong, who is the co-chair of the Government’s multi-ministry COVID-19 taskforce, explained that the Government is taking other precautions like stepping up cleaning, making masks mandatory and asking commuters not to talk on trains since it will be difficult to maintain physical distance on public transport.

Asserting that current precautions minimise the risk of virus transmission on trains, the ruling party politician went on to qualify public transport journeys as “transient risks” for COVID-19 since they are generally not long.

Social interactions, however, “are of a different magnitude of risk all together,” according to the Minister. Explaining why the Government implements strict restrictions on gatherings, Mr Wong said:'

Transient exposure is surely a relative term. How long is transient ok and how long is not ok. Is 30min exposure in a crowded train ok, less risk of being infected versus an hour or two at home with visitors that are friends or relatives?

According to all the reports on Covid19, as long as there is an infected person around, symptomatic or asymptomatic, a few minutes are all it takes to be infected.  So who is wiser? Perhaps if our Slow MRT is moving a bit faster, the exposure time could be lessen and the risk equally lessen. Until the day when our slow trains move at a faster speed than a snail, then this 'transient risks' could be more meaningful, I think.

What do you think?  Are 'transient risks' an alternate truth? A risk is a risk. A calculated risk, a no choice risk, a risk forced upon us because of the unthinkable population density that is going to double when the population hits 10m?