Originally Posted by
Seneca Pilot
Let's assume that a person goes to the grocery store once per week. And maybe to Home Depot once in that same week (remember the crapper is broke), and they go out to eat maybe twice. Now lets put them on vacation in a beach town nine hundred miles from home for the same week. They still go to the grocery store to stock up, no difference there. They go to the beach store to get little Jimmy a floatie. Since they don't have to go to Home depot because they don't have to fix the crapper at the rental, no difference there either. The beach is open air so same as going to the park. You'll still eat out some. You might be tempted to do that more than twice like you usually do at home but there's a pandemic so you just cook in the rental. No more risk there. The only thing you're doing that is out of the ordinary is being in another town and getting on a plane where masks are mandated and the air is changed every five or six minutes. Travelling does not carry more risk than living normally.
Again, you're missing the point. We are not living normally. There is a risk of being infected everytime you step out of the "assumed" safe space of your house.
Conveniently, you're assuming there is a 1 to 1 exchange of the quantity and level of all the risk factors, between staying at home, and embarking on a vacation. I do not share that view. People will be getting out more, and letting their hair down because well, they're on vacation.
It's no coincidence that as the towns and cities open up more in an attempt to get back to normal, including vacation travel, there has been a predictable spike in the cases of infection.
Increased frequency - increased probability - hence increased risk - Borne out by spike in the number of infections.