Switzerland's rate of chronic disease is also quite high, around 5/6th that of the US, or about 50% of adults. I don't see that number fluctuating too much between countries unless they're not collecting info and/or lying about their numbers. Humans are prone to developing lots of issues, what matters more is how well we can treat issues so that they don't effect people's lives in normal circumstances.

Switzerland's success dealing with COVID-19 is likely down to a combination of swift response and geography. They banned mass gatherings the day after their first confirmed case and quickly distributed fliers and information regarding safe hygiene practices. Initially, in late February, they banned gatherings of 1000 or more people, but brought it down to 100 or more people by the second week of March. With one canton going further and having a cap of only 50. In addition, all educational establishments were closed alongside the lower cap. A few days after this they closed all services deemed non-essential, and issued a relief package to cover most wages and business expenses. A few more days later they reduced the gathering cap down to 5 people.

These measures lead to an immediate and sharp decline in new cases, and by late April, they began to slowly ease restrictions. They started by allowing businesses where people didn't gather in mass to open, such as hair dressers. On top of that they also allowed some non-essential shops to open as well. Both types of businesses had to follow safety procedures. By the end of the second week of May, they began to open the rest of the shops as well as primary and secondary education schooling. Then by the start of the second week of June, they started opening higher education and other public services. Mass gatherings over 1000 people are still prohibited until at least October 1st.

In the USA and many other countries, politicians focus primarily on profiting and staying in power. This means they they're going to be very good at some things, but in no way makes them smart. They're just as vulnerable to manipulation and misinformation as anyone else is when it comes to topics they're not familiar with. Additionally, due to their primary interests, they will often avoid decisions that would cause short term loss, even if the long term gain massively outweighs that loss.

Regarding suppression of successful therapies, I haven't seen much info regarding that. There could be any number of reasons any one treatment is dismissed, such as having an unacceptable risk of complications.

From what I've seen, the actual false positive rate is lower than 5%. Not sure where you get this "90%" from. If you're referring to testing sensitivity in the USA, that particular test has an even lower false positive rate. A positive with that test guarantees the sample was infected with COVID, but it does not guarantee a patient is contagious. A test is only false positive if it returns positive but the patient is not infected at all, such as if the sample is contaminated after collection but before testing.

You could also be referring to a defective batch of tests in Connecticut, which led to 90 people receiving false-positive tests. Either way, the number of false positives is not high enough to be a concern.

If anything, higher sensitivity will make the US look better because it will make death rates look lower than elsewhere as it'll be including infections that didn't pose much risk to begin with.