Can't both be done? Can't society provide for both in immediate danger as well as those suffering less?

Do we need to stop tending for people's mental health because many are not eating?

Maybe the effort involved in categorising, understanding and prioritising suffering would be better used... well... actually reducing suffering.

Because when we think like this we risk dismanteling efforts that are really important, like protecting other animals from abandonment or abuse, or protecting the environment, because we risk putting them in lower hierarchical priority compared to our own most immediate form of suffering.