[Dilbert San Diego]

And we’re wearing masks due to the small risk that we will get this virus, a virus which is not fatal in the vast majority of cases.

There has not been a good risk analysis, cost/benefit, risk/benefit, or whatever the correct technical term is for balancing the risk of the disease vs. problems caused by us shutting down and doing things such as wearing masks.

[Dr. Sivana]

There has not been a good risk analysis, cost/benefit, risk/benefit, or whatever the correct technical term is for balancing the risk of the disease vs. problems caused by us shutting down and doing things such as wearing masks.

Yes. We have been letting the virologists and epidemiologists run the show, but have not included the immunologists and the statisticians. Just as most lawyers are extremely risk averse, virologists and epidemiologists are demonstrating that they have no sense of proportion because it is not their job to figure out how these things affect society at large, and the only satisfactory outcome is one where there are zero negative outcomes ... in their sphere alone.

[TexasGator]

“And we’re wearing masks due to the small risk that we will get this virus,”

No. We are wearing masks so that the infected will also wear masks.

[Svartalfiar]

And we’re wearing masks due to the small risk that we will get this virus, a virus which is not fatal in the vast majority of cases.

There has not been a good risk analysis, cost/benefit, risk/benefit, or whatever the correct technical term is for balancing the risk of the disease vs. problems caused by us shutting down and doing things such as wearing masks.

...Wearing masks that have minimal effect on actually slowing down any viral spread, for the .001% that have proper masks and are wearing them properly.