“First, do no harm.” It’s a saying almost as old as the idea of medicine itself. I heard it a lot in medical school. And it’s a saying that our state and national leaders need to think long and hard about right now.

In many respects, I am proud of the way our leaders and experts have stepped up to find ways of fighting the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. They acted quickly, on limited information, and based on varying levels of infection and death rates in other countries. But now, we have better data and experience that beg a more sophisticated approach as our nation grapples with balancing public health and the economy.

There’s another saying going around right now: “The cure must not be more deadly than the disease.” The more we delay re-opening, the more lives we endanger, violating the “do no harm” principle. For example, suicide and domestic violence have drastically increased after aggressive social distancing implementation.

Those who advocate for earlier business re-opening are often accused of devaluing human life. Yet, on April 16, the United Nations warned that the economic downturn would cause tens of millions to fall into extreme poverty and that hundreds of thousands of children could die.

Both sides must understand that social distancing and prosperity have value. Both COVID-19 and poverty take lives. There is a well-documented relationship between poverty and disease, just as there is between unemployment and suicide.

But advocates for later re-opening don’t seem to appreciate the notion behind a robust economy saving lives every day. Instead, predominantly the left makes rash arguments that those who discuss economic principles don’t value human life.

What began as the idea of “slowing the spread” has morphed into the argument that we should all stay home until a cure is found. That, I’m afraid, is not only an unreasonable mentality, but a fundamentally dangerous one.