No, it's not a fair point.

It's the same crap they have been spewing for months in order to justify the lockdowns and lifestyle restrictions.

We just don't know = lock down the world for months or years with no tradeoffs, no discussion of how to end them, and no questioning the lockdowns because > 1 people will or have died.

This "we just don't know so we're going to restrict the entire world and pretend individuals can't choose for themselves" argument is the reason that lifestyles have been restricted.

I'm not anti-mask I'm pro-choice.

Let individuals choose, not government.

How would that work? You go to a grocery store because you have to, and there's someone spewing out aerosols, potentially infected, while your mask protects them? Are you all for freeloading like say, making taxes optional?

What happens if people infect their elders? Who pays for the hospital costs if not the public? What if ICU capacity is taken up by anti-maskers and people who were taking precautions got unlucky and then have to die?

The trouble with that argument is that it leads to people who choose not to care, infecting those that do, which can lead to deaths, which many people dislike.

Historically, pandemics are one of the few acceptable reasons for such restrictions in the US, and it's very odd to me that it's been so controversial in that country.

The same as every flu season that we have had for years.

If the flu had no pre-existing immunity and 8x the mortality rate along with unknown side effects lasting months/years, then yes, exactly like the flu.

How can you say that coronavirus has unkown side effects lasting years when the virus has been around for less than a year? You are obviously being hyperbolic.

key word "unknown."

we do not yet know the long term consequences. there are people not feeling recovered after 6+ months. and children having heart inflammation problems after an a-symptomatic covid infection.