Obviously rearward looking metrics were irrelevant and no one, including me, is suggesting otherwise. You can make policies with the goal of reducing deaths in advance of measurement, and policymakers did.
The argument I am criticizing never mentions rearward metrics as a problem.
My impression was that a segment of the population felt that the lockdowns and other constraints imposed by policymaker were primarily fear based. This may have been due a perceived difference between religious versus secular acceptance of death (a continuation versus end). My point isn’t that policymakers can’t make nuanced decisions about the value of a human life (since it is done on a regular basis) but instead that from a policymakers perspective it was irrelevant. The bigger concern was the collapse of the health care system which is a non-negotiable.
The assumption that friends and family will calmly watch a family member’s untended death from covid when ICUs are over capacity and that essential workers will continue to show up for work knowing there is no hope for care if they fall ill is unrealistic in my opinion.
The argument I am criticizing never mentions rearward metrics as a problem.