That's my point.
Could I have an answer?
I mentioned it in another comment, but: the doctors are not the problem here. Of course doctors will recommend the best medical advice and I don't doubt the medical consensus. The issue is a broader one: what are the societal and economic consequences of total shutdown? Are these consequences better or worse than the estimated death count of the virus? Keep in mind that this includes death, too. Is there something we can do that attempts to minimize the negatives of both?
These are difficult questions and I don't pretend to have the answers. I'm simply noting that even suggesting an alternate path is shouted down.
Reading this thread, and several others and watching several other discourses, I do not see that to really be the case in whole. In part maybe, in whole? No.
Disagreements are being had sure about this or that element of this situation, but disagreements have great capacity to forment solutions whereas this 'taking your ball home' attitude of assuming dissent implicates snark and disagreements implicate being "shouted down" (especially when, as you've done earlier: presenting various whatabouts when there are people who are actively trying to understand this disease and bring about solutions are screaming "STOP THAT") is it self an alternative path I think many people prefer to avoid.
Good luck. Wash your hands.