Tamil Nadu caps checking fee in private sector at 3,000
Currently, the government’s publishes the number of samples tested in the whole State every day, and the number of favorable cases in each district. While this provides some sign of the frequency of the infection (and, therefore, threat to people in that district) on average throughout the State, it is insufficient to comprehend the threat in each district with sufficient confidence.
For instance, the variety of favorable cases in Madurai has increased greatly from 268 (100 active) on June 1, that is nearly three months after the very first case in Tamil Nadu, to 493 (164 active) on June17 This is a jump of 84%(64 %boost in active cases) in 17 days. Should this trigger great alarm in Madurai?
The easy answer is that we can not inform for sure without understanding how many individuals were tested in Madurai in those 17 days.
Also checked out: Tamil Nadu making up for lost momentum by testing at greater rate
For instance, if 10,000 of the approximately 2,81,000 samples checked in Tamil Nadu throughout these 17 days were performed in Madurai, then the positivity rate is only 2.25%(and the spread is low), so the typical local needs to not be alarmed about increased threat. If only 1,000 tests had been done, then the positivity rate is 22.5%(which suggests enormous spread), and homeowners ought to exercise extreme caution– possibly to the level of not coming out of their houses regardless of the Federal government relaxing conditions.
( Cumulative Tests Done per Million (10 lakhs) of Population from creation, published June 7, 2020)
Therefore, it is vitally important, for every single district in Tamil Nadu, to know the number of tests done each day. The one day the Government launched this type of info (on June 7, after weeks of needs from many sources), the information raised serious concerns and issues (blue bars in chart 1 above).
Also read: Increase testing is the method forward in TN, say specialists
It reveals that sample testing differs considerably by district, after adjusting for the population (tests per 10 lakh population). Why should this hold true? From a modelling priority, one might argue for testing more where the known occurrence is higher. Nevertheless, evaluating the rate of positive tests (likewise supplied by the federal government) we can see that does not fit either.
( Rate of favorable tests (# of positives/ # of total tests) (red line) with tests per million (blue bars) by District (7/6/20))
Simply put, the Federal government has neither done testing based on