Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's a painful cognitive dissonance that people seem to have about this disease. If your lockdown stops the spread of the disease, your population doesn't get immunity. No amount of infrastructure will allow the population to get immunity without all of the deaths that come with it. Absent effective medicines being developed, which are very unlikely to appear for a long time, countries need to consider that they'r…
Yeah, I don't see the point of crushing the curve in developing countries where it's not feasible to elevate substantially medical capacities. Where many people's ability to support themselves is a day by day process not paycheck to paycheck. It makes no sense to shut down hard other than political optics - all the rich countries are doing it therefore there's an expectation and pressure for leaders in these countrie…
It's not a 'political' choice or about 'optics'.
It's also not just 'old' people who are dying. It affects 50+ year olds in not insignificant numbers.
It depends whether you prioritise health or economics.
You can balance health and economics and choose to prioritise one _before_ the other.
It does however requires the political will to support the economy (and the poorest) whilst health care is prioritised to buy time during the exponential phase.