Precisely because of things like this.

Epidemiologists look only at the pandemic aspect. Politicians should look at the economy, the welfare, the general health, the strategic issues, and more. If you really think that an epidemiologist's response will account for things like mental health of toddlers you are mistaken.

I know that politicians have a bad name today but they are still elected officials who have an incentive (elections) to do what's best for the country as a whole.

Just to clarify- it was epidemiologists who pushed, understandably from their point of view, for the same lockdowns you define overreaching. It was mostly politicians who were the most reluctant to apply them. And the pressure in this direction was mostly from populism (Trump, Bolsonaro...), and from the finance/treasure ministries which feared the economy crisis.

The politicians follow the epidemiologists and the modelers etc. On the contrary, we have a case of a lack of politicians courageous enough to say no and lead / convince the people that it is the right thing to do.

Of the podcasts I’ve listened to with scientists and epidemiologists they all say that policy is not their domain. They say we are to provide advice within our domain and keep out of policy.

Possibly there is sampling bias with the podcasts I’m listening to and the people going on them.

> Why do we let politicians rather than epidemiologists make these decisions?

I think you got it exactly backwards. Politicians have successfully scapegoated themselves via epidemiologists (who's first and last consideration is to minimize infections) and people who refuse vaccination (even though the vaccinated are still just as epidemiologically relevant.)