You criticized the commenter for objecting to lockdown. Why are the people you refer to dying? Is it possible it is because they aren't quarantining and staying at home?
That matters because there are things that you have to do, and you don’t have a way to control other people’s decisions. Closing high-risk recreational activities means that someone can go shopping with less risk because the people near them weren’t hanging out at the bar the night before.
The value of a lockdown isn't in changing the behavior of those who are already voluntarily avoiding exposure -- its value is in changing the behavior of those who inconsiderately spread it to others during their essential travels outside of their house.
1. We have no idea what a null hypothesis scenario would be in Argentina or Peru.
2. Regardless, "flattening the curve" is more of a statement about the first or second derivative of case numbers.
2. Do you have data showing how effective the lockdowns were? Did they have a problem with compliance?
Here’s a recent publication which could inform your opinion - note especially the part about employment forcing people to leave their houses to work:
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...
“ Latin American countries have long had some of the most scarring income inequalities in the world, and they are predicted to worsen. The informal labour market is huge, making up 54% of all work across the region (up to 70% in some countries, such as Peru). Informal workers have little access to social protection and have no choice but to continue to work daily to earn a living. The result is that their capability to follow quarantine and social distancing measures is limited. Informal workers also have less access to health care.”
…
“The increases in obesity and diabetes in Latin America are surely major contributors to the high mortality rates. In Mexico and Chile, more than 75% of the female population is overweight. Nutrient-poor and energy-dense processed foods are often the only type of food readily affordable to the most disadvantaged people. Although some countries, including Brazil and Costa Rica, have a universal health-care system, most Latin American countries have large gaps in accessibility caused mainly by out-of-pocket health expenditure, which is 34% of total health spending.”
"Sweden had more deaths than Norway and Finland" yes they screwed up sending people to care homes when it first hit - over half of their deaths occurred there. like most of the countries that got hit early. Plus a lot of dark skinned immigrants (vitamin D levels have been shown to be a big factor). Those alone account for a lot of the difference. There is little reason to believe that lockdown had a very positive effect.
https://twitter.com/gummibear737/status/1298956333941743616?...