There's no reasonable evidence suggesting, for instance, that a shutdown is causing more deaths than it is preventing, and yet we continuously hear that take.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/who-official-urges-...
I'm pretty sure these conditions applied when the lockdowns were imposed in most countries.
So the WHO does not disagree with the poster at all.
And yeah, no one thinks lockdowns should be the primary or only way of addressing the pandemic.
Look at the poster’s comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24776722
The poster is talking about a ‘not worth it crowd’ dismissively, and as if they are inherently wrong.
The WHO supports the idea that it is almost always not worth it and that the conditions in which it is worth it are narrowly defined.
Whether or not the conditions obtain for it to be worth it is therefore a very valid discussion.
Dismissing (with bulverism) the concerns of those who question the value is not valid.
It is also certainly not true that we know that all of the lockdowns were justified based on the WHO’s advice.