What’s your takeaway from this now?
Worldometers provides data on tests per million of population.
The top 6 countries have a collective population of <10 million, so could perhaps be put aside. USA is at 20th position with 280,297 per million. UK, Spain and Belgium have broadly comparable testing rates with higher deaths per million rates.
Reasonably successful countries [lets say <50 deaths per million] with high testing rates include Australia, Lithuania, Cyprus, Singapore [5 deaths/M, 389,700 tests/M].
I would suggest that while high levels of testing are an important element of successfully managing the disease, more important is that the entire system of testing, locking down and treatment is properly coordinated and based on the science. Incompetence at the top cannot be compensated for by hard work at the base.
Personally I thought at the time I had gone too high, but I also thought the 250 per day would be much too low.
Given the infection rates and comparing with New York and New Jersey, my estimate was a death rate of about half of those two which I beleived was just about possible with better patient care and interventions, but the 250 per day is even lower - about one eighth the death rate of New York and New Jersey which seems remarkable.
One wonders if there has been some change to the criteria such as the UK government did when it changed its methodology and immediately reduced the number of deaths from COVID by around 20 thousand - one day UK was at 65 thousand and the next 40 thousand - just by a change in the timelines.
Yeah, I’ve been wondering about things along those lines, as it starts to seem more and more likely that the Northeast US outbreak is going to end up more or less in a class of its own. Then again, I don’t know if similar things could be happening in other countries, where their national numbers pale in relative comparison to outbreaks in their major cities that are similar to NY/NJ. Occasionally I see a story that has stats by city, but not often. But if there are hardly any other metro areas with stats like New York’s…well, one does start to wonder about other explanations. Or, maybe the Northeastern US is indeed just that much different.
Yeah, that sure sounds right. And just the whole approach to testing in the first place. These rapid tests absolutely seem like not just an improvement, although a huge one, but a radically different approach altogether. Couple that with the recent stories about cycle counts – gosh, how did it take six months for that to enter the conversation? – and it feels like there is reason for optimism going forward.
I don’t understand all this discussion of testing numbers in the context of government management. All the government can do is make sure there are enough tests to go around. But the government can’t force people to take tests.
At this point ISTM that there are no shortages of tests and anyone who wants one can walk into any number of places and get tested. The reason more tests aren’t being done is because most people are not interested in getting tested for no particular reason other than broader public health disease management.
In my county, the health department will only test you if you are displaying two or more symptoms (and “if supplies are available”). Lately, I have not heard of shortages. Testing availability through private providers varies, but no, it’s still not “anyone who wants one can get one.”
What do you mean by “varies”? Are there places where no private testing places exist? Where I live there are at least three urgent care places within a 10 minute drive from my house where you can get no-appointment, same day testing (results take 2 days).
Note that all insurances - including Medicaid, of course - will cover all testing at no cost to the patient.
In the early days of the pandemic (March, early April) there were criteria for people who needed tests, but at this point it absolutely is “anyone who wants one can get one”.
All the people I know who haven’t gotten tested have been for one of two reasons. 1) they have no reason to think they have covid and can’t be bothered, or 2) they suspect they might have covid and don’t want to subject themselves to a lengthy quarantine. That’s it. I haven’t heard of anyone having any sort of difficulty in getting a test in months and months and at least in my area it’s manifestly obvious that there isn’t any.
To reiterate, I don’t think at this point that the rate of covid testing has anything directly to do with government actions.
This is Kansas, a sprawling mostly-rural state where there are entire counties that have no urgent-care clinics, no private testing facilities, and no resident doctors. There are lots of places around here where your testing options are 1) the county health department, or 2) driving several hours. The county health departments are almost all outsourcing their testing to the state laboratory, which still limits most testing to people exhibiting two or more symptoms.
Note that there is nothing there about testing asymptomatic people.
Now the state lab will test asymptomatic people in certain situations–mostly congregate living such as long-term care facilities and the state prisons that have seen outbreaks–but “I just want a test” is not a good reason, and the state is still discouraging even private labs from testing those without symptoms or a good reason to suspect exposure.
Kansas Medicaid will cover COVID testing with an order from a qualified provider (PDF warning), meaning the patient has to convince a health professional that they need the test.
There still are criteria here. Apparently the situation is different where you live, but no, it is absolutely not “anyone who wants one can get one.”
If you’re talking about “entire counties that have no urgent-care clinics, no private testing facilities, and no resident doctors” then you’re talking about a rare situation that is not really relevant in this context. Counties of this sort are 1) very unusual, and 2) extremely low population. The number of people who live in area of this sort is a miniscule percentage of the US population.
We are discussing the extent to which the number of covid tests is a reflection of the availability or unavailability of these tests. Pointing to unique areas which in total add up to a fraction of a percent of the US population is not valid in this context.
It would be conjecture. I guessed deaths would trend down because we’re well into it and have a better idea of who to isolate and how to treat them. But that’s just guessing.
We keep hearing about the second wave but I’ve never found a good reference as to how to calculate it. If it’s based on historical events I’m not sure it’s valid to base estimates in today’s realm.
they keep saying the flu is going to make things much worse but the same techniques now in place to avoid spreading it should apply to the flu.
I was expecting more deaths from kids going back to school but maybe that’s showing up in a slower downward trend.
No, I’m talking about any county that has limited access to the services you apparently take for granted. Rural or suburban counties that don’t have “at least three urgent care places within a 10 minute drive” is just part of that, but even so, around a quarter (23%) of the American population live in census-designated “rural” areas.
Even in non-rural counties (such as my home, Shawnee County, Kansas, home to the state capital and NOT rural), availability varies. Here, the public health department and both major medical systems (KU-St. Francis and Stormont-Vail) are following the criteria that most people need symptoms before they are eligible for testing. Given the consolidation of medical providers means that most of the urgent-care facilities locally are part of one of those two systems, that doesn’t leave a lot of options.
Just for giggles, I tried scheduling a test through the local CVS pharmacy; given my age (50ish), lack of symptoms, and lack of risk factors, I “do not qualify for testing at this time.” For all practical purposes, I cannot get tested locally no matter how badly I may want it. Am I “anyone”?
Hell, I don’t have any medical place at all within a ten minute drive.
And I’m in New York State.
(To be fair, I’ve got a clinic with limited hours within a 15 minute drive, and a hospital with limited services at 20 minutes. But I’m in far from the most rural area even of NYState.)
– I just checked. The closest Covid testing center to me is the hospital 20 minutes away; but they require a referral. The closest center which doens’t require a referral is a bit over half an hours’ drive away, and not in this county. NYState is encouraging asymptomatic people to be tested. I have gag reflexes you wouldn’t believe, and am kind of afraid of the current standard test; though of course if I develop symptoms or am notified that I’ve been exposed I’ll get one.
I live in the southern Chicago suburbs- it’s rather populated here. I know of two places where I could be tested: My local county health department which tests for limited hours “first come first serve”, and an urgent care facility “by appointment only”. I haven’t inquired about a test, so I don’t know if the by-appointment-only place will require a referral or the presence of symptoms.
The southern hemisphere didn’t have a fly season this year:
Mask wearing during flu season should be how we do things going forward.
We Southern Hemispherans had our big flu vaccination push around late Feb-early March, and got the big drop in flu occurrence. Mask wearing was considered, until recently, unnecessary due to the low overall prevalence of coronavirus in the population and good adherence to social distancing. Masks are still only recommended when you cannot be sure of being able to stay the required distance.
Yes, I hope social distancing in flu season, along with hand-washing, and just being generally mindful that you should stay at home if you feel crook will become normal behaviour.
That’s the problem that some people can’t get tested at any time. And we all know, that there could be no symptoms at all. And what should they do in this case? Sit and wait?
Interesting. I hope that happens on this side of the equator.
I’ve been a little down on my state’s progress lately. It’s not horrible but I was expecting a better trend. Today it jumped up and freaked me out until I saw on the news they were adding deaths missed from previous weeks. Looks like a number of other states may have done the same. Not sure why the numbers get trashed after the holidays.
Tomato, tomahto. Around here, we had Labor Day followed literally the next day by the start of in-person school. It’ll be nearly impossible to tease out who got COVID-19 at their family barbecue on Labor Day weekend, or who got it from their kids at school the following Tuesday.
But yeah, overall I’m with you- I suspect that we’ll see a spike in reported cases starting right about now.
I’m also not entirely convinced that I believe that our county cases are as low as they say. Not from mistrust of the county officials- they’re not crazy GOP types or anything, but because the State is involved, and they ARE crazy GOP types. I just have this suspicion that there’s some sort of shenanigans going on with the state reporting and/or testing, and that our numbers are somehow artificially low as a result. I mean, the mask order went into effect here in Texas on July 2, and that’s about the time the case numbers started going down, but I didn’t really think masks were that effective as to reduce daily case numbers from somewhere over 1000 in my county down to as few as 175 in recent days.
Around here, I think SMU is going to be a huge driver. They’ve now increased their caution level, but they started school with absolute minimum precautions and even now I don’t get the feeling they are taking it seriously. Those frat parties are raging. Now, it will take a while for that to spread off campus, but I fewl like it’s inevitable.