CLThis letter to the editor discusses the handling of Chile's pandemic response under President Sebastián Piñera, criticizing the decision to implement a broad lockdown across the Greater Santiago area for 123 days. The author argues that an alternative approach, targeting protection for high-risk groups like the elderly while allowing other parts of the country to resume activities, was proposed but rejected by advisors. The proposal was supported by economist Ricardo Bitrán and presented through Chile’s ambassador in Portugal. The author highlights the economic and social costs of the lockdown, including a 6.1% drop in GDP, rising unemployment, school closures, and later inflation and interest rate challenges. He criticizes the lack of evaluation or explanation for the chosen strategy and notes that no one has been held accountable for the decisions made.
Bias read (Progressive): The article frames the pandemic response as a politically charged decision with significant negative consequences, criticizing the government's approach and highlighting the rejection of an alternative strategy proposed by a respected economist. It emphasizes the failure to evaluate alternatives and
