Then, it's not about lives, it's about years of life lost. The average age of the deaths is >80 in Italy, close to that in WA (median is >80, not sure about the average). In years of life lost, one boy who was shot while the lockdown was being enforced in Kenya (iirc) is "worth" on the order of 10-20 average COVID dead (even if you don't weight earlier years of life heavier, which I would). A 30-year-old committing suicide in isolation in the US (acquaintance of a friend) is worth close to that.
Then, if you want a real example of loss of life from a major economic crisis, look at life expectancy in Russia between 1980-2000, or birth rates during the same and GD.
Finally, I would also argue having experienced the former that for (low) 100s of millions of people in ex-USSR, you have to count the 90ies as years at least partially lost, because they were spent in survival mode with giant loss of time and human potential. Personally I'd rather live a good life and die at 80 than throw away my e.g. 30ies working two jobs and trying to find where I can buy cheaper pasta, and live till 85.
Everyone dies. All of humanity does not exist for most of the age of the universe, to say nothing of individuals. That's a trite thing to say but it is no less true. Not everyone gets to live a good life, even fewer in situations like this.
Our DNA wants to stay alive, the existential dread is understandable, but culturally I think we'd be a lot healthier if we put more value in quality of lives than the preservation of them. Now balancing this is not easy and I'm not saying in our current situation we should just lift all measures, but if framed that way the conversation starts to take on a different tone than just looking at potential death rates as the overall guiding function.
And the population of the Earth could handle that without a blip, particularly as it is concentrated in the groups with the least economic contribution.