This is kind of like saying the bullet didn't kill you, the loss of blood did. It's a distinction without a difference.

It’s more like if a bullet goes past you, and you calmly decide the best approach is to run full speed off the nearest cliff.

People made fun of how Sweden addressed it --known vulnerable populations and the rest were deprioritized for isolation/lockdowns and vaccines.

The jury is still out if their response was better, worse, or just different.

They had lower excess deaths from 2020-2022, which is good. But they also had significantly higher COVID deaths in vulnerable populations in 2020, mostly the elderly, which could have lead to the lower excess deaths in 2021-2022, because those elderly people were expected to die in those years anyway, leaving headroom for other excess deaths that wouldn't show up.

Economically and educationally they seemed to fare about the same as their neighboring nordic countries with stricter policies.

So right now it looks like they had about the same results as their neigbors, but sacrificed some of their elderly a few years earlier than they would have died anyway.

Well, my uncle had a heart attack during the covid pandemic but couldn't get a bed in the ICU as it was full of covid patients. Was he a covid death? I'd say yes (he lived in an region of low vaccination).

Hospital saturation is lightly correlated with vaccination rates. In fact, it’s probably reverse correlated. Rural areas which have a high degree of social isolation due to low population density didn’t run out if capacity to the same extent hospitals in large urban areas did. I’m very, very sorry for your loss, but maybe you are holding on to anger that is misplaced. Population density (lack of social isolation) was what drive hospital saturation. I was in a very low vaccination rate area, and we never get to even quarter capacity in the local hospitals.

This was in phoenix arizona. No anger on my part, just a dispassionate description.