I recall a case history of a manufacturer of scientific equipment last Century. Contamination by smoke particles interfered with their products' function so of course smoking was banned on the factory floor, but they still had production problems from employees who took smoking breaks or smoked when off work, so they instituted a complete smoking ban for factory employees.
They offered paid medical interventions to help existing employees stop smoking and eliminated their manufacturing problems, but then they noticed a beneficial side effect: absenteeism from illness declined for factory workers, and so did medical insurance claims, enough to affect their bottom line.
SO, they extended the 24/7 smoking ban to the office, and saved another bundle on lost productivity and insurance expense. The cleaner air sensitized employees to the after-smell of smoking, so after a while they instituted a policy of no smoking for visitors. This was enforced by the receptionist, who sent away any traveling salesman if she could smell smoke on their breath or clothing. This change also produced a measurable decline in absenteeism and medical claims!
The same applies to airborne viruses.
The challenge is how to develop a system which benefits people generally while preserving human freedom.
What tends to happen instead is that an authoritarian system is sold with flowery promises, but the result is a regime which ends human freedom and dignity while benefiting a tiny elite.