Which behavior, the decisions he makes based on his individual situation, or his behavior of reacting to risk quantitatively rather than qualitatively, approaching the uncertainty analytically rather than emotionally? His specific behavior, based on his individual circumstances, is to wear a mask and gloves when he goes to a grocery store, which is more precaution than most stores require. He has postponed a social event in his home that draws scores of people, suggesting that he would discourage events like the Sturgis rally. He is pleased to accommodate nervous friends by socializing outdoors and otherwise putting them at ease. He has Socrates say that a traveler should take different precautions from someone who stays at home, to avoid being a conduit of disease. It seems unfortunate to me that doing a sober cost-benefit analysis incorporating the best available evidence about risk, and being prepared to update conclusions as the evidence changes, is seen as contrarian (though I agree, it is highly atypical). Isn't it more important that the response be "effective" rather than "swift and uniform"? Swift and uniform adherence to bad practices won't help.If his behavior was generalized, even to healthy low-risk people, it would result in a significantly higher risk for him and vulnerable people.