> because there would be second order effects - including job losses, business failures, panic buying and food shortages, possible civil unrest Could you elabo

> because there would be second order effects - including job losses, business failures, panic buying and food shortages, possible civil unrest Could you elaborate on that? Why would there be more of these without a lockdown than with a lockdown? > collapse of existing health systems Yes, that seems to be a material and important factor. > loss of essential skilled people at all levels Perhaps, but would the impact be material? In particular, how would the number of skilled people lost to unmitigated Covid compare to losses due to natural factors (retirement, non-Covid health issues, moving to a job where the skills are no longer relevant, etc)? I am not necessarily arguing against your point, but I do feel that your arguments need more refinement to be persuasive.