this reply is for the general Mayo public and no one specifically. I apologize upfront for any offense I will cause in stating my passionate.beliefs. I'm 65 with stage 3 COPD. Therefore, I'm one of the enhanced risk of death people (from the coronavirus) virus. Nonetheless, I believe that our fear of contagion and serious health consequences, has resulted in unjustified and substantial damage to the majority of our population, specifically the younger (under 50) healthy population. Our fear however justified, (of contagion) has resulted in the following: shutting down many privately owned businesses throughout the country. It has resulted in the loss of employment for millions of young working people, many have young children to support. It has resulted in the loss of 30% of the wealth of those invested in the stock markets. It will result in hundreds of billions in payouts to various industries to stave off bankruptcies that would probably plunge the country into a depression. And economics aside, It has significantly eroded the quality of life for many younger people by shutting down: night clubs, restaurants, sporting events, schools, concerts, museums, hotels, casinos, health clubs, family gatherings, even ocean front beaches. Is it self-centered to force our younger population to pay that price for our fears? Realize, the chance of dying from the coronavirus is .02% for those 40 and under and .04% for those 40-50.. By comparison, the risk of death for those 20 and under from "regular" influenza is .41%. Therefore, this panic response is not about them but us. And is it a rational response? The, admittedly scant, data concludes casual contact will not result in contagion. Medical experts have consistently stated they either don't believe or have no proof to conclude that just touching surfaces touched by infected people will cause contagion-especially if we practice proper hand cleaning before touching our face. If we are that scared couldn't we choose self-isolation and refuse direct contact with others instead of demanding that all others make substantial quality of life sacrifices? Further, I thought the way a community builds up immunity or resistance to a "novel" virus is through interaction (assuming the virus isn't deadly). Even for the group at enhanced risk, like me, we have the right to live as we did before the virus if we are willing to assume the risks and don't force others to assume those same risks. It is a quality of life issue, and as such as adults we have the obligation to make informed choices. Here, the State has once again made those choices for us. If they are so wise, why didn't they do more to preempt this virus? I appreciate any objective criticisms. I'm biased and therefore, prone to make logical errors in my arguments. And again, I apologize for any appearance of disrespect to anyone on this site.