For some perspective on recent events, at its worst, the rate of U.S. mortality from COVID-19 (20-30/100k) will still only be about half the years-long murder rate in Baltimore (50/100k). Even today one is far more likely to be murdered in Baltimore than to die of COVID-19.

If the U.S. population faced the same risk as Baltimore, we would expect 165,000 to die of murder each year. Would this health threat prompt the same massive economic and public health response we have seen in response to COVID-19? Almost certainly not.

Across the U.S., unintentional injuries claim far more lives than would COVID-19 even under worst-case projections. Yet in many states, one can still ride a motorcycle without a helmet, and in my neighboring state of New Hampshire ("Live Free or Die"), even be unbuckled in a car.

The U.S. COVID-19 experience has laid bare the striking double-standards that underlie our thresholds for taking decisive action in response to public health threats. I expect this will have a powerful transformative effect on the field of public health in the coming years.

What will be the new accepted cost per quality year of life saved by a public health intervention? For years we have said about $100k per QALY. I expect in the final analysis, the cost spent even under worst-case projections for COVID-19's uncontrolled spread will be much higher.

In the aftermath of the economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic we may soon face stark increases in mortality from many causes, including suicide and poorly-controlled chronic disease. By current reasoning we should see a similar all-of-nation response to these new epidemics.

Will we accept a suspension of constitutional liberties to effect a reduction in deaths from suicides, and in high-crime areas, in homicides? Will we pay the trillions necessary to provide healthcare to reduce mortality from chronic diseases? Given our actions today, why not?