The reason I don't give the Hoover paper much credence is that none of the authors have any background in virology, epidemiology, or population biology, and there's no detailed account of the basis for their "calculations." This is why the paper is full of rookie errors. The most obvious is comparing data from an actual set of events with a hypothetical set. Unless the authors traveled to a parallel universe in which no SAH orders were issued, no stores closed, etc, then we lack the most crucial data set, which is how many people would have died due to cv19 in the absence of protective measures. One has to only look at what happened in Guayaquil, Ecuador or parts of Brazil to get some sense that losses might have been far more horrific than what Atlas et al are suggesting.