This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/17/us/ca-coronavirus-covid-testing.html

The article has changed 15 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 11 Version 12
Is California Doing Enough Coronavirus Testing? Is California Doing Enough Coronavirus Testing?
(8 days later)
Good morning.Good morning.
(This article is part of the California Today newsletter. Sign up here to receive it by email.)(This article is part of the California Today newsletter. Sign up here to receive it by email.)
Today we have another installment of Your Lead, where we answer readers’ questions about how the pandemic is changing daily life in California. Submit your questions here.Today we have another installment of Your Lead, where we answer readers’ questions about how the pandemic is changing daily life in California. Submit your questions here.
Kaye Handley, a reader in Mendocino, asked: “Has California’s testing capability caught up with other states?”Kaye Handley, a reader in Mendocino, asked: “Has California’s testing capability caught up with other states?”
A recent article by my colleague Keith Collins found that California is one of 34 states that are currently not testing enough and that the state is 34 percent of the level that researchers at the Harvard Global Health Institute deemed necessary to mitigate the spread of the virus. By comparison, Vermont and Connecticut are way above, testing over 400 percent of the level above the target set by researchers. Arizona, Florida and Texas make up the bottom three.A recent article by my colleague Keith Collins found that California is one of 34 states that are currently not testing enough and that the state is 34 percent of the level that researchers at the Harvard Global Health Institute deemed necessary to mitigate the spread of the virus. By comparison, Vermont and Connecticut are way above, testing over 400 percent of the level above the target set by researchers. Arizona, Florida and Texas make up the bottom three.
And now, backlogs are causing delays in getting test results, so state officials have released new, stricter testing guidelines that will make it much tougher for many Californians who don’t have symptoms to get tested.And now, backlogs are causing delays in getting test results, so state officials have released new, stricter testing guidelines that will make it much tougher for many Californians who don’t have symptoms to get tested.
[Read more about the revised guidelines.][Read more about the revised guidelines.]
To understand how California’s testing performance matches up against other states, I asked Keith, a graphics editor, some questions about his findings and what it means for the Golden State.To understand how California’s testing performance matches up against other states, I asked Keith, a graphics editor, some questions about his findings and what it means for the Golden State.
According to your article, California is one of 34 states that you found to be below the testing target. What exactly does that mean, and what are the implications?According to your article, California is one of 34 states that you found to be below the testing target. What exactly does that mean, and what are the implications?
So California is pretty tricky because it’s so big. It’s in the top 10 in terms of daily tests per 100,000 people, which is pretty good, especially for a state its size. Unfortunately with testing, there’s not a lot of data that’s more granular than the state level so it’s hard to say where in the state testing is the worst.So California is pretty tricky because it’s so big. It’s in the top 10 in terms of daily tests per 100,000 people, which is pretty good, especially for a state its size. Unfortunately with testing, there’s not a lot of data that’s more granular than the state level so it’s hard to say where in the state testing is the worst.
In terms of the number of people it’s testing every day, it’s doing pretty well. But in terms of the target that Harvard has set as the minimum that a place needs to be doing to mitigate the virus, it’s way behind. It’s only doing 34 percent of that target right now.In terms of the number of people it’s testing every day, it’s doing pretty well. But in terms of the target that Harvard has set as the minimum that a place needs to be doing to mitigate the virus, it’s way behind. It’s only doing 34 percent of that target right now.
How did researchers come up with the target goals in this model?How did researchers come up with the target goals in this model?
It’s based on the idea that anyone who has symptoms should be tested and then for anyone who tests positive, 10 of their contacts should also be tested. The idea is that you can’t really have a safe reopening if you’re not able to keep everyone who is sick isolated and that includes people who are asymptomatic. And right now a lot of places are just not testing people who are asymptomatic, at least not in a very concerted way.It’s based on the idea that anyone who has symptoms should be tested and then for anyone who tests positive, 10 of their contacts should also be tested. The idea is that you can’t really have a safe reopening if you’re not able to keep everyone who is sick isolated and that includes people who are asymptomatic. And right now a lot of places are just not testing people who are asymptomatic, at least not in a very concerted way.
These targets try to estimate how many tests you would need to do every day if you were going to identify nearly everyone who has the virus. And that’s going to include a lot of people who are not currently being tested right now.These targets try to estimate how many tests you would need to do every day if you were going to identify nearly everyone who has the virus. And that’s going to include a lot of people who are not currently being tested right now.
It looks like there are currently 11 states, including New York, Hawaii and Massachusetts, that are currently meeting their target and six others that are close.It looks like there are currently 11 states, including New York, Hawaii and Massachusetts, that are currently meeting their target and six others that are close.
In the article’s charts you can see that a lot of those states only got to that level recently and some of those are trending downward again. Those charts are relative to the target so it can also mean that the target is rising and testing is steady. But New York and New Jersey really ramped up testing because they were hit so hard in the beginning. Still, only in early to mid-June have they started really catching up to that target.In the article’s charts you can see that a lot of those states only got to that level recently and some of those are trending downward again. Those charts are relative to the target so it can also mean that the target is rising and testing is steady. But New York and New Jersey really ramped up testing because they were hit so hard in the beginning. Still, only in early to mid-June have they started really catching up to that target.
It is a hard target to hit, but it is a conservative estimate. The Harvard researchers say that this target is really just to mitigate the spread of the virus. They have another estimate to suppress the virus. Their suppression target is way higher than this.It is a hard target to hit, but it is a conservative estimate. The Harvard researchers say that this target is really just to mitigate the spread of the virus. They have another estimate to suppress the virus. Their suppression target is way higher than this.
What does this mean for California’s efforts to control the pandemic?What does this mean for California’s efforts to control the pandemic?
I’m sure there are parts of California that are doing better, but over all what it means is that as a state, California is not going to be able to do a good job of keeping people who have the coronavirus isolated. When it comes to reopening that’s the whole goal.I’m sure there are parts of California that are doing better, but over all what it means is that as a state, California is not going to be able to do a good job of keeping people who have the coronavirus isolated. When it comes to reopening that’s the whole goal.
[See The Times’s map tracking cases in California.][See The Times’s map tracking cases in California.]
It looks like from these estimates that California should be doing triple the amount of testing that it is currently doing. Is that right?It looks like from these estimates that California should be doing triple the amount of testing that it is currently doing. Is that right?
Yes. If you look at the actual number of tests California is doing as of Tuesday, it looks like the two-week average per day in California is 107,000. And so, if that’s 34 percent then they roughly need three times as many per day.Yes. If you look at the actual number of tests California is doing as of Tuesday, it looks like the two-week average per day in California is 107,000. And so, if that’s 34 percent then they roughly need three times as many per day.
So how does California compare to other states on testing?So how does California compare to other states on testing?
California, like the U.S. as a whole, has been ramping up testing and going back and forth between doing enough and not doing enough. I think the easiest way to think about it is just that these measures are pretty rough. They’re not perfect. It’s really just a way of trying to measure how close a government is at understanding the full breadth of its local outbreak.California, like the U.S. as a whole, has been ramping up testing and going back and forth between doing enough and not doing enough. I think the easiest way to think about it is just that these measures are pretty rough. They’re not perfect. It’s really just a way of trying to measure how close a government is at understanding the full breadth of its local outbreak.
With California, the really important thing is to understand that this number, if you did it for only Northern California or only Southern California, it could potentially be very different when you’re dealing with such a huge population and so many different testing centers and so many different local governments.With California, the really important thing is to understand that this number, if you did it for only Northern California or only Southern California, it could potentially be very different when you’re dealing with such a huge population and so many different testing centers and so many different local governments.
Updated August 17, 2020 Updated August 24, 2020
What does California’s 8 percent positivity rate say about its potential for reopening?What does California’s 8 percent positivity rate say about its potential for reopening?
Over the last two weeks 8 percent of people who have been tested in California have been positive. The World Health Organization says that number should be at 5 percent or below for at least two weeks before a place can start reopening. So California is not quite there yet.Over the last two weeks 8 percent of people who have been tested in California have been positive. The World Health Organization says that number should be at 5 percent or below for at least two weeks before a place can start reopening. So California is not quite there yet.
[Read the full story.][Read the full story.]
On Thursday, amid swirling questions about what colleges will look like in the fall, the University of California answered one of them: Who got in?On Thursday, amid swirling questions about what colleges will look like in the fall, the University of California answered one of them: Who got in?
For the first time, Chicano or Latino students are the biggest group of admitted freshmen from California, 36 percent, which means the class looks a bit more like California’s overall population than it has in the past. The freshman class is also the largest ever admitted, with almost 80,000 California students.For the first time, Chicano or Latino students are the biggest group of admitted freshmen from California, 36 percent, which means the class looks a bit more like California’s overall population than it has in the past. The freshman class is also the largest ever admitted, with almost 80,000 California students.
[Read more about who got into the University of California last year.][Read more about who got into the University of California last year.]
Although U.C. leaders have long grappled with questions about how to boost enrollment among Latino, Black, Indigenous and Pacific Islander students — historically underrepresented in the state’s most prestigious university system — as The Los Angeles Times reported, efforts have taken on extra urgency this year against the backdrop of uprisings against racism in a vast array of American institutions, and, in California, a debate over whether to restore affirmative action.Although U.C. leaders have long grappled with questions about how to boost enrollment among Latino, Black, Indigenous and Pacific Islander students — historically underrepresented in the state’s most prestigious university system — as The Los Angeles Times reported, efforts have taken on extra urgency this year against the backdrop of uprisings against racism in a vast array of American institutions, and, in California, a debate over whether to restore affirmative action.
So, given all that, we want to hear from prospective students.So, given all that, we want to hear from prospective students.
Do you identify as Latino, Black, Indigenous or Pacific Islander? Were you admitted to a U.C.? Email us at CAToday@nytimes.com — we’d like to talk with you about how you’re feeling and what you’re considering before you enroll. (And if you know someone who fits that description, please forward this to them.)Do you identify as Latino, Black, Indigenous or Pacific Islander? Were you admitted to a U.C.? Email us at CAToday@nytimes.com — we’d like to talk with you about how you’re feeling and what you’re considering before you enroll. (And if you know someone who fits that description, please forward this to them.)
California Today goes live at 6:30 a.m. Pacific time weekdays. Tell us what you want to see: CAtoday@nytimes.com. Were you forwarded this email? Sign up for California Today here and read every edition online here.California Today goes live at 6:30 a.m. Pacific time weekdays. Tell us what you want to see: CAtoday@nytimes.com. Were you forwarded this email? Sign up for California Today here and read every edition online here.
Jill Cowan grew up in Orange County, went to school at U.C. Berkeley and has reported all over the state, including the Bay Area, Bakersfield and Los Angeles — but she always wants to see more. Follow along here or on Twitter.Jill Cowan grew up in Orange County, went to school at U.C. Berkeley and has reported all over the state, including the Bay Area, Bakersfield and Los Angeles — but she always wants to see more. Follow along here or on Twitter.
California Today is edited by Julie Bloom, who grew up in Los Angeles and graduated from U.C. Berkeley.California Today is edited by Julie Bloom, who grew up in Los Angeles and graduated from U.C. Berkeley.