You're deliberately excluding the rest of his sentence. If things were normal, yes, buying 1-2 weeks of supplies would be fine. But they're obviously NOT normal. Stores/businesses are closing, supply is inconsistent, and wanting to limit unnecessary interactions make it prudent to plan for greater than your normal 1-2 weeks.
I wasn't passing judgement on whether it's a right or wrong or rational thing to do.
I'm saying that this literally is the definition of panic buying: buying significantly more than you normally would, because you fear that goods will be unavailable, or you will be unable to do your regular shopping in the future.
I think the term "panic buying" is a really bad term for it, then, if you can be entirely not-in-a-panic and fit the definition of "panic buying". It paints it as something it's decidedly not, and people who don't encounter the term very often are likely to make incorrect assumptions about it.
I did my "panic buying" in February, and there was no panic or urgency whatsoever involved.
Panic is uncontrollable fear. Fear is a normal emotion, especially in this situation. Panic would imply buying five years worth of toilet paper because someone told you trees would go extinct.
Words are often used in ways that are etymologically inappropriate. Although “panic buying” sounds like it should require panic, it doesn’t. Other examples of this phenomenon include “automobile” meaning something different from “self-driving” and the way “American” implies “not Mexican” even though Mexico is a country in the continent of America.
panic also explains fighting over toiletpaper. if you weren't panicking you'd simply wait until the toilet paper is restocked. there is enough evidence out there that people are panicking.
Rational or not, that's the definition of panic buying. If everyone bought their normal 1-2 weeks worth of supplies then there wouldn't be a problem.