Nope, part of the same problem; over reaction. You didn't answer my question. In a bad flu year, are you going to advocate doing what governments across the country have done through this mess? If so, have you done so in the past? If not, why is it so important now and in the future?
It was prudent when you could extrapolate a 10% mortality rate. Now, with the numbers available, and a very questionable mortality rate of .6% it just doesn't make sense, unless it's not about health but about control.
I agree with that. The flu is 0.1% in a bad year, can be more with certain flues but those spread less. In our worst COVID situation, NYC, the mortality was 0.25% of the population as a whole, with 25% exposed according to random antibody tests. That's 1% mortality from exposure, but with collapsed hosptals like Elmhurst basically killing everyone who walked in the door.
Under more normal circumstances the mortality should be about 1/2 of that or about 0.5%. Obviously makes no sense to shut the economy down. Just protect the vulnerable and let everyone else be as cautious as they want to be or need to be. I would recommend masks for everyone but you see that as an over-reaction.
I guess your claim is that alliowing or promoting or requiring a mask as an over-reaction paves the way for the over reaction of closures. I don't see it that way. I see it as the opposite: masks help keep the economy open.