And Texas Caves In
The last bastion of sanity has jumped on the "stay at home" bandwagon. They just sent me an email that they have closed all state parks to save the 1% who may die from the dreaded super virus. Texas...
Forum Discussion
tommyznr wrote:Interesting reading, but I do tend to raise my eyebrows about their assumptions on rate of growth. They don't seem to take into account when figuring rate of growth, that they also have to factor in the rate of testing done. As the rate of testing increases, the rate of positive tests will also increase, probably in direct proportion.pianotuna wrote:
Much to my horror I just learned that Canada has done more testing than USA. I consider the testing in Canada to be far too low.
That means that the data sets on numbers of infections are more or less a fairy tale, and those numbers are already horrendous to me with a death count at over 18000.
I hope to heck I am totally wrong.
You can play with the data here
Canada daily tests/1000 = .38, US =.42
Canada total tests/day = 162,258, US = 225,890
Canada total test = 359,269, US = 2.36 million
Canada total tests/1000 = 9.98 US = 7.12
Hopefully I got that right for today's numbers.
So, your statement could be technically correct in one way to look at the data.
There is an excellent explanation on how the case fatality rate is calculated and how that number cannot be used to extrapolate future death rates etc.
It seems like that if large scale testing was done earlier, the number of positive cases would be much higher, thus showing a different rate of growth. Nobody was testing in January and February, then a huge rise in testing in late March as tests became more widely available, so yeah, there should be a correspondingly huge rise in positive tests. And I believe they're not testing non-respiratory cases.
