The number of test results gathered must be heavily influenced by the incentives and disincentives to take a test. If there is any perception of excessive penalties for failing, people will avoid tests.
This may be offset by compulsion to test for workers in certain sectors. Or perhaps a minority of customers who are actually prepared to test.
So after we adjust for people dodging tests, I would imagine the actual number of cases is far higher.
I also note the article referred to over 20% of cases being linked to bars.
So that means that almost 80% of cases are linked to establishments other than bars ? Some analysis of the other 80% would be useful.
Also, if I understand, bars and other establishments selling alcohol are just about the only major customer service business required to test customers, but they still only account for just over 20% of infections ?
Maybe the prohibition supporters in the guvernor's office need to rethink their position.