Young healthy people aren't at significant risk, all the data shows this.
A young healthy person shouldn't be living in fear. Should they protect the vulnerable? Of course! but why are they living in fear?
Define significant risk? Many young and healthy have died and been hospitalized, a much greater amount than other contagious illnesses cause. And as
@biobook has pointed out, we have no clue how this looks long term. Why is it irrational to be cautious when facing a virus who’s long term effects we know NOTHING about? See Zika. This is not some pie in the sky war possibility. This is a real and tangible threat.
You can call it living in fear and negligible risk as I can call ignoring the threat dangerous and reckless. A more proper way of describing the two sides would be as more or less cautious.
Unless, of course, you’re just trying to disparage anyone who disagrees with you. You wouldn’t do that after calling out others for doing that, would you? Your head isn’t stuck somewhere, is it?
These numbers are very significant. They may very well have had prior anxiety issues, but the notion that there are no significant mental health issues due to the lockdown is ridiculous.
Who denied there are mental heath issues due to the lockdown? But as I’ve said before, how do you know what mental health issues would arise of greater death and devastation? How do you know the anxiety is not a direct result of the hundreds of thousands of hospitalizations (and deaths)? Those people have families and friends, you know.