I'm honestly surprised DUI laws are not brought up more as an analogy when discussing mask mandates and other public health measures.
An argument for driving drunk that sounds a lot like more than a few no-mask and no-vax arguments; "I drive drunk all the time and have never hurt anyone; I will probably never kill anyone. If you can't accept the risk of driving on the roads with me then stay home!".
And also, in both cases of course it's the potential harm to others that tends to make the laws acceptable. In the case of SCOTUS, it's settled that the government can take EXTREME measures in the name of public health.. Likely far beyond anything we have had to deal with so far.
But the courts acceptance (which is the source of truth of what is legal) is contextual. So the slippery slope arguments are off base IMHO because something upheld in the context of the pandemic could be struck down outside the pandemic..
We live by rule of law and it's a glorious thing. As much as I enjoy being cynical, getting together to agree on rules we wouldn't otherwise hold ourselves to(game theory?) is an amazing thing.