I wasn't referring to Covid, but the attitude in general. My first post ever on DDF was about pot being labeled a gateway drug. I believe that there is an inherent danger by lumping all drugs together, because when a person tries pot and it doesn't kill them or turn them into the caricature of a drug addict that was painted for them by the authority figures, they automatically downgrade the danger of all the other drugs that were associated with pot when they were being lectured about drugs. I feel that a similar attitude is emerging around Covid. In the beginning, due to a lack of knowledge, there was a certain amount of fear-mongering used in an effort to get everyone to take it seriously. The drawback is that now people are seeing they can survive this, and they don't care to get it. The fallacy with this thinking is that just because you crossed the street on a red once and didn't get hit by a car, doesn't mean you're Superman. Just because you tried heroin once and didn't overdose or get addicted, doesn't make heroin safe. And just because you survived a Covid infection once, doesn't mean your body will react the same way to subsequent infections.
To @ExGingi's point, that life is about risk assessment and finding a way to live with it, that's very fair. Not everyone should be holed up in their homes. But all risks are not equal. Precautions regarding Covid are not just about your personal risk, but the risk you present to the general public by walking around with a contagious infection. This is not deciding whether or not to wear a seatbelt. This is smoking in an indoor public room. You are free to risk your life by smoking. You are not free to expose everyone else in the room to your second-hand smoke.
Well stated. The first paragraph harps on a theme I've brought up several times of the changing narrative (along with dishonesty and lack of humility). SENSIBLE precautions would be adhered to much better if indeed they were well communicated, planned and thought through (I've pointed to Singapore giving out masks to everyone), and properly measured and constantly reassessed. If you tell everyone we're going to restrict you until there's a vaccine, it simply won't work.
But if you tell everyone to take certain logical measures that aren't a total lockdown, and make it as easy as possible for people to follow and as hard as possible for people to abuse (by price gouging, etc.), telling them that it's about FLATTENING THE CURVE a.k.a. SLOWING THE SPREAD while treatment modalities improve, and vaccine research is progressing, you would be much more likely to get compliance.
As for risking others - as I pointed out to
@Ergel, I think that could be avoided with controlled deliberate exposure.