Actually, the research suggests that lockdowns DO prevent deaths and they DO prevent the spread of infection in the long run.

You can skim over this study if you would like to look at the receipts, or this one, and even this one. NPR's Global Health and Development Correspondent also wrote about it here, and a shorter article written by someone, who's credibility I admittedly cannot verify as much as the other article, can be found here.

Now...Sweden. I doubt you'll get very far in any deep analysis of corona virus when bringing up a small country who's entire culture was KNOWN for being socially distant well before this pandemic happened. Especially one who's death rates are HIGHER than their Scandinavian neighbors who had better legal implementation of lockdowns and quarantine. Also Sweden's economy isn't doing too well even though they never went into a proper lockdown in the first place. All this comes back to my original point: there are health risks involved for ANYONE who catches COVID even if they are asymptomatic so it's dangerous and stupid to think that Sweden is all the better for not going into lockdown early on. it begs the question: What was even the point of Sweden avoiding lockdown when their death rates are nearly proportional to Italy's (the country that's BEGGING for other nations to take COVID seriously and to not make the same disastrous mistakes that they did) and their economy is still suffering?

I don't think you are purposefully being deceitful or acting in bad faith, so I hope this is all helpful and informative to you.