The conclusion of the article isn’t controversial but the logic is incomplete. Of course policy-makers should continuously evaluate whether or not shutting dow

The conclusion of the article isn’t controversial but the logic is incomplete. Of course policy-makers should continuously evaluate whether or not shutting down a whole economy is worth it. Definitely we need better testing to understand the true number of infections. But you can’t completely disregard current human responses when a) the condition can be fatal (game over, there’s no retry) and b) the virus can leave behind long-lasting damage. In this case a purely quantitative argument based on fatality statistics feels myopic. For sure agreed we need to find ways of gathering more and accurate information.