> Eh. I have seen conflicting data on this. For example, some studies attributed only 1% of COVID spread to indoor dining (sorry in advance, I don't have a cita

> Eh. I have seen conflicting data on this. For example, some studies attributed only 1% of COVID spread to indoor dining (sorry in advance, I don't have a citation) This is pretty useless without details on the study conditions. If the study includes a population for which indoor dining is allowed 10% (on a per capita per day basis) but masks are mandated in other venues at a 0% rate, then the proportional amount of spread drom indoor dining should much lower that if the data is collected where indoor dining is allowed 100% and mask mandate coverage is 100%. Similarly, if you don't bother to wear a mask in other indoor settings, indoor dining won't be as high among your risks. If you work from home, always mask everywhere and are very careful with social distancing, and have a similarly cautious bubble, indoor dining will probably be among your highest risk. I mean "should" as in "if managing your covid risks is something you care about, this is a low impact way to reduce those risks when your local situation makes that important." Since I am not advocating any externally imposed restrictions, I think you are reading things into my comment that aren't there.