I would suggest that is evidence that they did indeed do a better job of treating more patients (note both ‘better’ AND ‘more’).
What value testing had however is another matter entirely. Testing alone does nothing, I assume we all agree on that. Targeted testing of key workers is indeed very valuable at preventing spread. Mass random test only gives us information, it’s the value of that information and the actions we implement as a result that matter. Testing when the virus first enters a new region is very valuable in helping to contain it. But once it’s out of the bag, that’s when I struggle to see the value (other than data gathering).
I believe the WHO value testing for data gathering reasons: it helps us to understand the virus. Without testing, we have no idea how many people are infected, the more we test, the greater the sample size, the more reliable the estimation is regarding total number infected.
I get all of that, and that is why I am certainly not arguing against testing... but it’s wrong for a society in the midst of an already embedded epidemic to think testing is gonna save them. It ain’t !