Statistical Duncedom?

Physicist Carlo Rovelli has opined that 'statistical illiteracy' can be fatal in a pandemic (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/oct/26/statistical-illiteracy-pandemic-numbers-interpret). He suggests that 'most' adults have a vague (I would say 'very vague'at best) understanding of averages, variability and correlations to help them deal with the uncertainties of life but I'm not so sure. Otherwise, no one would pay to enter the National Lottery (you might have to be'in it, to win it' but your chances of winning are similar to the probability of being hit by a meteorite!). In deed, all forms of commercial gambling depend on the odds being heavily stacked against the punter. Yet, in the advertising, the 'customer' (and there are many) is exhorted to use their special knowledge or 'smarts' to place a bet. And how do we explain the attractions of conspiracy 'theories', where occassional coincidences are often waved around as categorical 'proof'? Carlo suggests that things could be improved by teaching primary school children the fundamental ideas of probability theory and statistics, before honing these topics at secondary school. The trouble is that, in this brave new world, the general public are not actually allowed to work out the probabilities for themselves (even if they are competent to do so). Directives come down from on high, often from people who seem to be statistical illiterates themselves. Furthermore, statistics are often presented to the public, at present, in ways that suit the policy directors (presumably on the grounds that we 'need' highly simplified accounts or 'truths'). If the general public got better at statistics, they might argue back!