2. I would like to see that cross referenced against ventilation capacity. Again, restaurants are supposed to be changing their air over with outside air a lot, the idea that a properly ventilated space would have represent an infection risk days later is in the “doubt” category for me. Basically, please provide a source.
Heck, last time I was in Vegas I could barely smell people smoking a few feet away from me, the ventilation was that good. If cigarette smoke is the metaphor we’re going with for viral particles and dividers, that strongly implies that better ventilation yields a lower infection risk.
3. Exactly. This is an argument for masking when you’re not eating. It’s not 0 risk, but it’s lower. How much lower is debatable, and obviously depends on more circumstances than just masking policy alone.
Personally I’d rather just get takeout when local case loads are high, like right now.