Due to questions with the data we can't be sure who continues to lead, but even this chart shows the US leading for a moment a couple days earlier. Regardless, the USA is still doing more daily tests than any other country. That much is undeniable. Daily testing per capita was not part of my initial claim and the only reason we ever switched to talking about that is because PMV said that was the only metric he would accept and it seemed like I was able to oblige.
That said, it turns out that Germany has started blood testing (serology/antibody) which seems to be why their testing jumped 50,000 a day. This is great news, but it's apples to oranges if we want to know who is testing more for active cases. PCR tests whether or not you have it and blood tests determine whether or not you ever had it.
I stopped claiming that the moment you showed otherwise.
Anyone who genuinely needs a test doesn't have to lie about it. I only mention lying to get one since I don't need one, yet now we are hung up on that pointless detail. If you were around a confirmed case or need to know before caring for someone immunocompromised or had recently returned from traveling to a risky area or show symptoms or any number of reasons then, yes, you can get tested right away in the USA. It does extrapolate.
Thanks.
Regardless of how the US compares to other countries, I still think it's useful to look at how the rate of daily increase in testing has changed:
Totals for the US
Daily totals for all metrics collected from January 2020 to the present.
covidtracking.com
Last I checked we topped out at 230k then slipped back now to 163k. That's when I started seeing articles about labs with twice the capacity they were using and free test that no testing centers would accept because their computer systems weren't set up to talk to the lab that made the tests. It seems that we have huge untapped capacity and that we are meeting enough demand that they aren't even bothering to deal with those to increase testing capacity. Maybe it's time to blow the doors off and open up testing to everyone instead of just those who need it?
I'm not too sure about that though. It's not a competition and I don't think people should be encouraged to leave their homes for frivolous testing just because the testing capacity is there. Surely, some of the people administering the tests could be helping with the real crunch (hospitals, PPE, etc).
I wrote that before manly showed me that a few other countries may be ahead in daily testing per capita. Never saw that stuff you wrote about Senegal and Denmark since I was already writing my response when you edited it in. At that point I was still under the impression that my response showed that. Guess you'll want me to go back and respond to the edit I missed:
They are already below the US in total testing, and total per capita is not a metric we can use to determine who leads on testing. That metric will always give an edge to smaller populations that are easy to test thoroughly, like Luxembourg and Iceland. There's a reason Luxembourg and Iceland have significantly more cases per capita than any other countries. They had more early visibility due to their advantage of being able to test more thoroughly without a huge rollout for a huge population.
Well, the US has hit 0.7 daily tests per thousand even though many states only report the number of people tested. Since Denmark also reports people tested instead of tests performed that does put them ahead per capita. Regardless, it is substantially easier for smaller countries that are similarly well-developed to test more per capita. That is why I don't exclusively consider daily tests per capita when I judge testing capacity.
If anything, a country's testing ability should be rated on how fast it ramps to meet daily need/demand. We failed that early on due to bad tests and rejecting the WHO tests but we have since caught up extremely fast. That's why the chart looks like this:
We can continue to judge based on how well testing keeps up with need/demand. Looking at the chart, it seems we might have already plateaued if we don't change something to boost demand. It looks like the testing backlog was cleared with 230,000 daily tests last weekend and then fell back down to the sustained demand for current need (~163,000 and below). Among developed countries that have reached this balance I don't feel it's a stretch to call the one doing more daily testing than any other country a "leader."
I feel it's more important to use our extra testing capacity for other countries than to drum up more demand by mandating testing or opening it up frivolous testing to everyone who's curious... which you could argue we've already done since anyone can say they feel bad, testing areas are all over, and there don't seem to be lines any of them.
The people attached to their conclusions are the ones failing to acknowledge that testing has improved in the US, which is what I have been arguing against for two weeks now before anyone could claim that the US leads the world on testing. You pressed me to support that claim with per-capita daily numbers and I thought I found the info you were asking for.
As soon as manly pointed out that the data did show the US lagging other countries I agreed and noted that it was still fair to say that the statistical disadvantage in the way tests were counted means that the US may still have higher daily per capita numbers than the countries we were discussing. Are you saying that it was not fair to point that out?
It may not appear that I acknowledged this right away simply because my reply to you came after his post. That keeps happening because I can't finish composing a post before another comes in. It doesn't mean I'm slipping back and forth.
As we've established, neither absolute nor per-capita numbers can really reflect how well or poorly the US is doing since there are more factors for larger countries that can't be statistically eliminated by comparing per-capita. This is why it would not be fair to say that Luxembourg or Iceland are leading the world in testing.
You sure about that?
...yeah yeah... you mean per capita. I know.
Still: "way behind?" I look at that and I see something worth acknowledging regardless of whether or not we still have a long way to go to compare to Luxemboug and Iceland or whether Denmark is slightly higher per-capita even though that's not as big of an accomplishment considering their size (hence why no one would say any of them "lead the world").
Do you see my point? If anything, I think it weaseling to exclusively consider per capita metrics that can't possibly apply to a larger country since the smaller ones will forever be ahead in percentage of population tested without ever needing such daily per capita testing. The goal was never to test everyone or to test a higher daily number per capita. The goal was to increase daily testing capacity to meet/exceed daily testing needs. With the number leveling off after a spike that seems to have been from catching up to the backlog, it seems we've done that. True daily capacity is something more than that 230k spike/peak from a week ago... we just aren't using it.
I admitted it readily each time though I was always one post behind between you and manly so it looks like I ignored one of you when replying to the other.
I don't think the comparison focus should be on "wealthier" countries (again: Luxembourg?). I'd ask what country of similar size could test as many? Obviously none, since we can see that no country comes close in total daily tests (163-230k) regardless of size.