Cases are recorded. If it's not in a medical record, it's not a case. Technically, the reference was to ~3000 but someone then wanted to dispute that cases was not the same as infections. The number is irrelevant. If it's not known for sure, it's not a case and it's not a known infection, medically. I don't understand how factual correction gets downvoted, but here we are.

This is a pedantic word splitting argument. The relevant measure is number of people infected no the number we happen to know for sure because we finally got around to testing. If we had South Korea’s level of testing then maybe your argument would warrant breath behind words, under the current circumstances save your breath.

> This is a pedantic word splitting argument.

No, it's a correction.

>> > Also 3000 confirmed cases does not mean 3000 actual infections.

This statement is factually incorrect.

> The relevant measure is number of people infected no the number we happen to know for sure because we finally got around to testing

That is irrelevant to the response I gave. It seems to be a popular interest today, in trying to clarify a concept, which is unrelated. I am done engaging with this derail.