It depends on the denominator. There is no free lunch. If there is an estimate for death prevention, what is the estimated cost in lives?
Given that death is a certainty for all, how many lost person-days do the 50k deaths represent? Since the lock down means no normal activities such as routine doctor visits, how many person-days would be lost due to undetected illness or delayed treatment?
Staying locked in is a strategy for preventing excess deaths from overwhelming a health system. It isn't a long term strategy for eliminating all virus related death.
Here's the other side - How many deaths are acceptable? If death is a certainty for all, should we just get rid of the health care systems? Should we stop research into some of the diseases? Which ones? How many person-days/productivity has been lost because of preventable deaths?
We are talking about a 4/6/8 week lockdown, that's not long term, that's immediate term.
No, no, please don’t waste time constructing persons of straw. One insinuating that my position is “get rid of healthcare” is especially odious since the counterfactual I raised was one considering impacts of preventative care missed due to lockdowns. You made a rhetorical claim: “locked in for 6 weeks and if that had prevented 50000 deaths, how is that not worth it?”
How do you know if it is worth it or not if you don’t know the cost of being locked in for 6 weeks? Ignoring the other track doesn’t seem a path to a well considered decision.
Given that death is a certainty for all, how many lost person-days do the 50k deaths represent? Since the lock down means no normal activities such as routine doctor visits, how many person-days would be lost due to undetected illness or delayed treatment?
Staying locked in is a strategy for preventing excess deaths from overwhelming a health system. It isn't a long term strategy for eliminating all virus related death.