> Without shutting down it wouldn't be amortized. Huh? No it wouldn't. Read my other comments in the thread, the point is that after it works its way through t

> Without shutting down it wouldn't be amortized. Huh? No it wouldn't. Read my other comments in the thread, the point is that after it works its way through the population, the set of SARS-CoV-2-naive individuals becomes dominated by new entrants to the world (babies/toddlers), who don't die from COVID-19. So over a period of 5 years, the average yearly death will be this year's deaths / 5. That doesn't hold in the same way for the Flu since it does kill babies. > You'd effectively have millions of additional deaths from lack of hospital capacity This is just false. I can't really debunk it because you didn't make an actual argument, so let's leave it at that. > And additionally you'd have millions of more people with debilitating complications from all causes. Huh? Are you saying complications from COVID-19 itself, or are you saying non-covid reasons which would get neglected due to lack of medical care? > That's absolute insanity. You're devaluing life. Stop it. It's frankly scary to think you're out there. No, I actually value life, which is why I understand how precious it is, and what a cruel thing it is to do to subject an entire planet to a regime of isolation and fear. As I've said elsewhere in this thread, I also believe that lockdown leads to more mortality than doing nothing, so even if you don't care about wellbeing and just want to myopically look at lives saved, I'm arguing that lockdown is worse on both counts.