I’m not sure about this study. It uses five countries, one of which is Iran so not sure about reliable data there, and one of which is the US which has had, as you pointed out, a very regional and not-so-holistic response (ie how do we say the US has school closure when half the states did and half did not).

I get that states count data differently, but I think assuming a blanket 10% addition to FLs rates is a bit rich. CA has been SIGNIFICANTLY worse recently, exactly how much of that is explained by testing methodology who knows but it’s not a great look given the shutdown differences.

The ‘but it could have been worse!’ argument is a classic but also unconvincing. The lockdowns MAY have saved a few lives, but we also KNOW they destroyed many in their own right. It’s not a zero sum game.