I will (partially) agree with you that the mortality and morbidity numbers are inflated - non-symptomatic carriers are not being tested which skews the data. The severe morbidity rate and mortality rate in the general population are probably about half of the rates that are being quoted for DIAGNOSED cases. This is supported by the lower rates in countries that have tested extensively. But even at half the commonly quoted rates, a 10% severe illness rate (hospitalisation), 2.5% very severe illness rate (ICU/ventilation)and a ~1% mortality rate are still nothing to sneeze at (pun intended). Since you are supreme in your invulnerability as a young person who thinks their risk is very low (sacrifice the older generation, they've had a good life already and they are not economically active anyway?) let me give you a little food for thought. The pattern of illness that is emerging from Italy and the USA is that the rate of severe illness in younger people is not much different to the older. Their mortality rate is lower because they have better respiratory reserve and less co-morbidities, so tolerate the decrease in lung function better. While they might survive better, they do end up with lung damage which can take years to resolve, and may be permanent. So if you think in terms of the risk of maybe not being able to ride your bike again because of lung damage, at the morbidity rates quoted, will that change your attitude?