States aren't testing uniformly for coronavirus. That's creating a distorted picture of the outbreak

[iluvtennis]

Testing rates from article - highest to lowest
1) NY: 5 tests per 1000 people
2) Washington state: 4 tests per 1000 people
3) New Mexico: 4 tests per 1000 people
4) California: 2 tests per 1000 people
5) Texas: 1 test per 1000 people

States aren’t testing uniformly for coronavirus. That’s creating a distorted picture of the outbreak
https://bit.ly/2UW1rCj

3/27/20

The United States has surpassed the rest of the world in the number of confirmed cases of COVID-19, with 85,762, as of today (March 27). That came as no surprise to most experts, as it took seven weeks after the first case of the disease was identified in the U.S. for the country to start testing en masse — plenty of time for the SARS-CoV-2 virus to spread, undetected.

Now, 10 weeks after the country's first case, testing in the U.S. is beginning to ramp up significantly, but not uniformly. As of Thursday (March 26), 20 states were only up to a testing rate of 1 per 1,000 people. And six states had tested fewer than 1,000 people. That means it's difficult to know, based on reported numbers alone, how widely the coronavirus is circulating in a given state or community.

"The problem is we haven't had enough tests," said Steffanie Strathdee, the associate dean of Global Health Sciences at the University of California San Diego's Department of Medicine and author of "The Perfect Predator" (Hachette Books, 2019). "There's not even enough tests to test the people who are sick."

Nearly half of all known U.S. coronavirus cases are in New York, which has reported more than 38,977 cases. As of March 26, the state had recorded 103,479 tests, according to The COVID Tracking Project, a nationwide dataset managed by volunteer analysts and journalists. With a population of 19.4 million, that's a testing rate of around 5 tests per 1,000 people, which is the highest testing rate in the country.

Washington state is a distant second, having recorded 34,292 tests for the state's population of about 7.8 million. That's a rate of 4 tests per 1,000 people. In third place is New Mexico, which has run only about 7,800 tests, but that's a rate of 4 tests per 1,000 people (the state's population is just over 2 million).

The two most populous states in the U.S. are California and Texas, with 39 million and 29 million people, respectively. So far, California is testing at a rate of 2 tests per 1,000 residents, but about 57,400 tests are still waiting on results, according to the state's Department of Public Health. Texas is testing at a rate of only 1 test per 1,000 people.

....continued at link

We need test kits, test kits, and more test kits. We won't know the true impact of this virus unles the ppl are tested.

[redstatebluegirl]

1. The orange plague doesn't want tests done.

He doesn't want anyone to know how many people are really sick and how many would not have been if he had acted in January.

[JesterBear]

2. True impact

If by true impact you mean the death, then we cant know u til they are dead. Testing people only tells you that someone wants to be tested, then the number turns into a statistic. As of right now, the best measure of the true impact is by walking outside and seeing the impact.

[iluvtennis]

3. Testing to show how extensive the outbreak is. If you test ppl, then like South Korea did, we can

isolate those who have CV19 from those who don't and reduce the breakout.

[Igel]

6. But that's not entirely what South Korea did.

They had two groups: one was well defined and they tested them all because they were all exposed. The other was like here--you're sick, you're at risk. Either way, they traced contacts, which required a lot of assistance. When the first group didn't say the name of all their members, they were charged with a crime--not divulging membership. To get information on contacts, they published names.

That meant they found more people to test, and when they did, they isolated them. None of this "self-isolate, be a good boy or girl" crap. No. You were isolated. Step out of line, you're isolated in jail.

The other thing is that from the get-go they told private companies, "Please develop test kits and produce them." None of the centralized government "we're in charge." Quick certification, and mass produce. Iceland, another leader in % tested, did the same. The countries lagging? Strong, central governments with bureaucracies that like control and where there's little social trust.

[gibraltar72]

4. Yeah it's a crazy quilt

I noticed some states have so few tests available they have to only test health care workers and those with every symptom. That is why my state is in such trouble. Our number of tests to positives is off the charts. Last I looked we were about 1.2 positive for every two tests.

[Johnny2X2X]

5. Yes

Been saying this since the beginning.

And also, we will not know the number of infected until it’s all over. It will all be done by scientists making estimates after.

[Igel]

7. And that should be kept in mind when cheering, "We're #1!"

Serological studies will be needed to answer the question.

NY's testing rate is the highest in the country because it screamed and was issued more resources than the rest of the country. That's the thing with rationing--if your self-perceived need is greater than the perception of others' needs, then it's unfair if you don't get more. And since we're pretty much all self-biased, equal = oppression.

[uponit7771]

8. K&R, The lack of federally quardinated testing is killing more Americans

[fleabiscuit]

9. K&R

[roamer65]

10. This 🦠 has been here since December, IMO.

The true number of infected is in the millions. They just didn’t know what it was until late November in Wuhan.