>>12974242A) Sure, but it's not at all logical to think about it like that. People should visualize the probabilities.
Let's assume both X and Y are just as likely, let's say the incidence is 1 in 100k for both. Neither is related to your way of living so essentially it comes down to chance. It doesn't matter wether you are trying to maximize your own odds, or maximize the lives saved, you should always pick the scenario that saves most like regardless of how the lives saved are distributed between diseases. I think it's human fallacy to think about this categorically, "well if I'm in Y I would die", when you are MORE likely to die of eithet disease should you choose the option III which most chose.
B). I don't think many people think it that far when posed with this scenario.
C) That's just a stupid way to think as A though. People are literally willing to kill 8 people because of a categorization.
>>12974268I think for this study the assumption is that the diseases follow similar normal distribution.
