The COVID-19 pandemic

[danbrotherston]

This and SO much this.

I'm so tired of the "we're not testing everyone" or "I know some uncle who they wouldn't test when he had a headache" concluding with "thus the numbers we have are completely false/useless/a lie/whatever".

The numbers are not complete, it does not mean they are not useful, and it does not mean they do not show trends.

The level of stats/science/math literacy is so low, worse, the level of reading comprehension is also shockingly low.

The problem is that we need mass testing in order to ease the very strict restrictions we are living under right now. This is why people are fixated on the levels of testing, and I think that's valid.

If we are preoccupied with whether the health care system is going to be able to handle the number of cases, the data we have now demonstrate that well enough by (you're right) showing trends, and by looking at the current numbers of deaths and hospitalizations.

Ontario has repeatedly missed its own targets for number of tests administered. It is unclear whether its current targets of 14,000 per day by April 29 and 16,000 per day by May 6 are in line with the levels of testing required once restrictions start to be eased. I suspect not.

We're not testing everyone. We're not testing even near everyone. And everyone knows that, as a result, the true number of cases is many times higher than the reported number. That's not the problem. The problem is, we are testing a very small number of people, and that won't be enough when restrictions are loosened and the spread naturally increases as a result.

First, I don't think that's why people are fixated on testing. If they were, they'd be saying, we need more testing to lift restrictions. Instead most are saying something like "these numbers are meaningless/fake news because they don't do enough testing"--fundamentally different.

And second, "We are testing a very small number of people"...this isn't true either, or at least is totally subjective, I don't call 10,000 per day a "small number". The question is whether we are testing enough, and I trust the experts to know how many we need to test (basically enough for a random sampling of the population + those with symptoms--to watch for community spread--as well as enough to contact trace everyone who does have it--which is dependent on the number of infections), and shockingly I trust the government to actually follow those recommendations--which is why I'm not freaking out about those numbers, we aren't ready to lift restrictions yet anyway--there are other things that need to happen first as well--just like the virus itself, what is happening now, isn't relevant to what will be happening in a week or in a month.  Just like I wasn't unconcerned because we only had a few dozen cases a few months ago, because I knew it would get worse, I am also not concerned that we are doing maybe half the tests we need to be doing when we lift restrictions now because we won't be doing that for some time.