I agree, but the death rate of COVID-19 may not be high enough to justify a huge increase in risk tolerance.
We'll get the first test results at end of march/start of april.
If I have 30% chance of dying I take anything that lowers the chance significantly.
And you would have to be very old and with strong preconditions, to have a 30% death chance with corvid-19. And then any side effects would be even more fatal.
Remdesivir has already gone through safety trials years ago, it's in phase 3 now.
Risk tolerance should be seen as a sliding scale, not as a binary.
You can take good measures that slows down the economy without endangering people's lives. Of course you can also consider social unrest to be a risk but that's another matter.
Leaving that aside, I've also found the economy helpful in providing me with clothes and shelter.
And when I have gone off in the woods and played survivalist (and yes, I have), I depended on the economy not only for much of the gear which enabled this, but also for keeping me safe from attack by other tribes while off in the woods. No-one was fighting me for a particular foraging/hunting ground.