Yes, safety can be exaggerated!

I know, you should not believe things you read in ads (see picture below), but unfortunately I have lately met several civilian and military professionals all used to dangerous situations claiming that:

"You should always chose the safest alternative!"

An ad claiming that "safety can nerver be exaggerated". (C) H Liwång 2014.

However, if that was true nothing would ever be accomplished. The scary thing is that even if I point out that choosing the safest alternative can seriously decrease the gain most stand by their first statement promoting safety first!

Most people I meet seems to, on a personal level (and maybe unconsciously), weigh expected gain against expected risk (however sometimes with very personal utility functions for gain and risk). For some/several government safety officials and military personnel (with a professional life that does not come down to a finical bottom line) this basic understanding for risk management seems to disappear. Can it be because they have lost track of what they are trying to achieve, or that the achievements are on such a high and/or abstract level that they don’t see them? Because, only if there is no meaning with your activity, only then does it make sense to always chose the safest alternative.