Perhaps you’re misreading me. I’m not arguing a right/wrong here or dismissing deaths because something else that we don’t think about causes the same amount of deaths, but more asking about our underlying assumptions that’s guiding very strong beliefs. And I believe people feel patronized about comparisons to automobile fatalities, but to flip that around, I think people are being patronizing to automobile fatalities. My point is more asking ourselves to question, to what amount of human life sacrifice do we draw the line for shutting down the economy indefinitely for? I won’t get in to how that will cause death in other ways, but the decision doesn’t exist in a vacuum. My assumption is that for a lot of people, they’d say 5k is too many (this is independent of someone’s prediction but more a question of where they draw the line). I’m not here to argue if that’s right or wrong and I’m not passing judgments on anyone, but it warrants further evaluating that belief and looking at some comps, not as a ‘gotcha,’ but for honest discovery of how we view human life vs. life convenience, and not to believe that we value human life higher just by viewing one situation in isolation.