Obviously your quoted poster’s concerns are less about “hand washing”, “wear a mask if you have symptoms”, and “stay home” while you recover, and instead are about an overreaction in which entire businesses are forced to shut down, children without symptoms are forced to wear masks even as they run and play, and people are forcibly prevented from leaving their homes “just because it’s flu season”.

This may be necessary, at times, for COVID-19, but as you recognized, not for the normal flu.

Given the spotty record of both public and private policy with regards to using actual science as a driver, these are not invalid concerns.

Or put differently, rather than presuming that anyone against “doing something” is against “common sense” measures, perhaps we should be supportive of making sure that we do something, AND that the “something” that we do remain in the realm of common sense, to assuage the very real concerns that “doing something” could mean something more harmful than good.

If I (salaried) take a sick day, I get paid the same amount from the same source; there’s next-to-no economic incentive for me to risk the health of others by working when sick: problem is solved.

We could more or less force the same by law for scheduled hourly workers. It’s a little more difficult for gig. It’s basically impossible (as I see it) to put self-employed people at the same outcome as if they worked without substantial risks of under-comping some and over-comping others.

That is to say most people don't have allergies to confuse with illness and although you might wake up feeling poorly for a number of reasons flu sufferers are liable to suffer from one or more distinguishable symptoms for example for myself when I've contracted the flu I always get a really shitty body ache.

It's possible to get a cold without also having a fever. You are absolutely correct about that but even in that instance the majority are liable to be able to know when they are ill. They just don't stay home because the social pressure has been in favor of bringing your sickness to work as if you were doing everyone a favor by showing up and making your cohorts sick.

Sometimes my throat is sore but its just allergy drainage. It doesn't help that the things I'm allergic to line up with flu season.

https://www.aaaai.org/about-aaaai/newsroom/allergy-statistic...

https://acaai.org/news/facts-statistics/allergies

1 Hay fever, or allergic rhinitis, is a common condition with symptoms similar to those of a cold. There may be sneezing, congestion, runny nose, and sinus pressure. It is caused by an allergic response to airborne substances, such as pollen.

2 The American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology (AAAAI) is the most prominent membership organization of more than 7,000 allergists / immunologists (in the United States, Canada and 72 other countries) and patients' trusted resource for allergies, asthma and immune deficiency disorders. This membership includes allergist / immunologists, other medical specialists, allied health and related healthcare professionals—all with a special interest in the research and treatment of allergic and immunologic diseases.

WebMD's doesn't actually seem to actually source their data at all despite styling it like a link for some reason and since their is a disparity between what the CDC and AAAAI say I strongly suspect they are full of shit

Depends on what you want to achieve. If you like a increase of infection, you do it like here in germany and close down hardware stores etc. multiple times on short notice, without telling when they will open again - so people try to storm them before they close, all coming closely together by doing so, which they would not have otherwise.

For example here in order to avoid contamination in public transports they limited the hours of service. Consequence: same number of people took transport but in less time, increasing density and contact.

Similarly with the curfew forcing shops to close earlier in the day, more people gather in less time.

We've sorted a lot of this out over the past year, but there is an all time distrust of institutions surrounding both policymakers and the public health recommendations informing them, and there's a reason for it.

We can either help assuage people's fears (whether you see them as founded or unfounded) by empathizing with their concerns and experiences and addressing them while ensuring that any measures enacted remain rooted in science that we can trust...

OR we can be part of the problem for why there's so much distrust, by ignoring anyone who may have real experiences that have caused them to lose trust in our science and health institutions, and telling them that it's all in their head.

I strongly hope for the former, myself.

- Paid sick leave. First and foremost.

- Increased flexibility for people WFH as possible if sick or vulnerable.

That's really about it. Maybe masking, though that well has been throughly poisoned.

Well, yeah, they can be asymptomatic, spread their sickness to other kids, who then take it home to their parents and grandparents.

Public health measures that you disdain aren't popular where they are because your neighbors want to step on your neck they are popular because people who know more than you do know they on net save lives.

When there is nothing to be gained by such measure support will blow away like dust in the wind. There is no battle for you to fight.

If anything, politicians have vastly under-managed the situation, timidly afraid of offending constituents' offense at any inconvenience, and only partially at best following sound science.

In states that did issue orders for masks and stay-at-home, the orders were weak, late, and lifted early, resulting in multiple waves that only abate now because of the rapid deployment of vaccines.

Most importantly, there was very little and late funding to cover the costs of those who should most have been shut down, group travel, entertainment, dining, etc. - should have been fully shut down immediately, and everyone's costs covered.

6-10 weeks of hard shutdown, while standing up a full masking, test/trace/isolate protocol would have handled it, yet few countries did it.

A few countries did implement early, strong, and effective measures, such as New Zealand. They also then opened up many months earlier than the rest of the world with near-normal life.

Where are the politicians "drunk with power" who are restarting lockdowns for their own gratification?

Where is the advantage for such a "drunk on power" politician? What could they possible gain by unnecessarily implementing measures that are seen at best by the smart ones who understand it as a necessary inconvenience, and by the rest as an assault on them?

Even flat-out authoritarians do no such thing. E.g., China, who is unashamed to run literal concentration camps for Uyghur minorities, and who did hard lockdowns at the start, is not opening up as soon as scientifically feasible.

Unless you can show some citations of evidence, this looks a lot less like a real phenomenon, and more like a pseudo-libertarian teenager's trope.

Let's not forget a substantial portion of the population working from home, using less public transportation (choosing to travel by car when traveling at all), a huge decrease in tourism and large public gatherings, much less eating out at restaurants, contactless food delivery becoming the norm, etc.

So many factors figure in to why much of the (wealthy, developed) world is a lot more resistant to contagious pathogens today than it was a year ago.