I think you're just conflating two quite different approaches. The US, for example has ordered 150m tests in it's latest deal - or enough to test half the US po

I think you're just conflating two quite different approaches. The US, for example has ordered 150m tests in it's latest deal - or enough to test half the US population. The UK is announcing a project to do 10m tests per day - or about the whole UK population in a week. The NYT currently has this infographic [1] about whether states are testing enough and whilst it varies depending on how the states are doing, but no one is close to suggesting that they need 15,000 tests per capita per day - it's in the hundreds per capita per day. Also, there's just an obvious messaging side to this - the plan is being deliberately amplified in the UK with "leaked" documents claiming the plan is incredibly difficult and using technology that needs to be invented, but let's use their analogy - the moonshot. The moonshot required genuine new technology to be invented, it took the best part of a decade. Suggesting that you're going to invent new technology for a problem you're also claiming to solve within 3 months is just not credible. [1]:https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/coronavirus-testing.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/coronavirus-test...