Well, to be responsible, all you have to do is not understate the risks. In fact, it's probably best to err on the side of making it seem scary. If you said "

Well, to be responsible, all you have to do is not understate the risks. In fact, it's probably best to err on the side of making it seem scary. If you said "N people have died, M people are known to have gotten it and recovered, so you should not assume your survival chances are better than M / (N+M)", with N being at least, say, 100 for sample-sizing purposes, I think that would be reasonable—so one could have said that probably back in February 2020. That would have yielded overestimates—probably 1-10% IIRC—but you could probably find some people willing to risk even those odds for the sake of their country or the world (or bragging rights).