3 ms·
It is functional alright. Here is an example: California has tested 8,316 people total so far [0]. My province of Alberta has tested 8,887 people [1]. This is
by smnrchrds 7y ago
It is functional alright. Here is an example:
California has tested 8,316 people total so far [0]. My province of Alberta has tested 8,887 people [1]. This is even though the population of my province is 11% of the population of California. In fact, the population of California alone is higher than the population of Canada, let alone my province.
Put it another way, California has tested 210 people per million residents. Alberta has tested an order of magnitude more, 2030.
Edit: Today's numbers for Alberta are in. Alberta has completed 10,598 tests, or 2,425 tests per million population.
[0] From https://covidtracking.com/data/ https://covidtracking.com/data/
There is some uncertainty about the number, but not so much that the real number would be an order of magnitude higher.
[1] https://www.alberta.ca/coronavirus-info-for-albertans.aspx https://www.alberta.ca/coronavirus-info-for-albertans.aspx
- onepointsixC 7y agoCiting testing after the CDC's failed initial test reagents is not painting a whole picture of care capability. The testing will catch up in the US. What isn't easy to scale is the critical care of patients who are hardest hit. That is a capability which the US excels in: [1] USA has 34.7 ICU Beds / 100K [2] Canada has 9.5 ICU Beds / 100K [1]: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4351597/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4351597/ [2]: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/275101876_Critical_Care_capacity_in_Canada_results_of_a_national_cross-sectional_study https://www.researchgate.net/publication/275101876_Critical_...
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]