For starters, I'm not calling you out specifically here, just this notion that the data is pretty clear. I haven't seen a single data source that isnt biased in how they are presenting the data. Its really tough to compare countries, hell even states, when the criteria for testing, the availability of testing equipment, and population densities and demographics are so wildly different.
Take Nebraska for example, we have the capacity to test around 100 people a day i believe right now. The doctors here are focusing those tests on the worst of the worst, people that are at high risk. The positive rate from those tests is hovering around 5%. If we expand our capacity to 500 tests a day our number of positive tests will go up, but the morbidity rate will go way down as we are able to test people that are farther and farther from the original criteria that was established when we could only test 100 of the highest risk patients.
Nebraska has 62 confirmed cases. Those are confirmed because those people fit the strict testing criteria we have to have in place.
Of course South Korea looks like they are winning. They tested the shit out of people and now their math looks good. But the testing didnt control COVID, their social distancing and self-quarantining did.
If we want the US to look like we are winning the battle on paper, then lets just test as many people as possible but it wont be the tests that are helping, its the policies and mandates that are in place and already operational that are working.
I'm not saying this isnt a scary virus for a lot of people. I'm just saying that the data is heavily skewed and misleading.