Re Teaching the under-10 age group.

The TPR approach is one-sided and ineffective as it perhaps promotes superficial receptive language skills and does not promote productive language skills like speaking.

The benefits of using TPR with young learners is well documented, if you cannot be bothered to enlighten yourself about this, I see no reason to continue attempting to discuss it with you.

One of its listed "advantages" is that it does not require a higher amount of preparation for the teacher, and that would mean a "lazy" teacher.

This would not mean a lazy teacher, it would mean a section of the lesson that requires little by way of physical preparation time, TPR makes up maybe 5-10 minutes of an hours lesson. Using it is beneficial to young learners and does not denote a lazy teacher.

In those European countries that I am acquainted with (France, Benelux, Scandinavia, Germany, Austria, Switzerland), it is not recognized and used in public education.

TPR is used internationally with L2 language acquisition with young learners. You have never taught YL and so how you can attest that it is not used in these countries? Or are you privy to what goes on in these countries YL classrooms? If so, please do enlighten us as to what methods they use, as I note you have still not done so... All you have done is dismiss the international methodology used without saying how it should be done instead.

BTW, since when does making faces form part of TPR? It certainly forms part of crappy EF, but EF is a pretend "school" at best and no decent school.

At what point did I say it does? This is a classic strawman; you are relying on the audience not noticing that your argument does not apply to the original proposition, and unfortunately I am not one of your mindless sycophants and I do notice that you are trying to turn this in to your traditional 'bash EF'. So I shan't dignify this statement with anything more than it deserves.