> US testing is so porous as to be meaningless, even today. We've been testing well over 5000 people per day on average for over a month. Suppose 500 tests per

> US testing is so porous as to be meaningless, even today. We've been testing well over 5000 people per day on average for over a month. Suppose 500 tests per day are randomly administered for the purpose of estimating overall prevalence of the virus. That sample ought to pretty clearly establish the total number of cases within 5%. I'm sure there are some clever statisticians at the CDC with some fancy Bayesian inference or something who can push the confidence up even higher using all the non-randomly administered tests.