Hubei population is 60M. So they'd have to do 2.7 Million tests to have the same degree of testing at Iceland.
Even with an excessive lockdown, it seems that just on this issue alone, China's numbers look really quite wrong.
That there was a breakout in other parts of the country and almost no deaths look very suspicious.
Combined with the fact that all public Chinese information is part of an 'orchestration of public opinion' (i.e. propaganda effort) and is not based in any reality, so of course, there's a credibility problem to begin with.
So you are saying that countries and regions that are under-testing relative to Iceland all have numbers that are wrong?
"That there was a breakout in other parts of the country and almost no deaths look very suspicious."
That is what you don't get, there was never an outbreak in the rest of the country outside of Hubei. The number of cases never exceeded 3,000 in any other province.
No, I'm saying that Iceland's numbers are strong, that they compare remotely well with most other nations (ie more testing, lower rate of infection), all of which, when taking together, make China's numbers look fabricated.
"That is what you don't get, there was never an outbreak in the rest of the country outside of Hubei."
3000 is an enormous number of cases, tantamount to a 'major outbreak'.
2820 positive cases.
Positive rate: 0.8%
Iceland: 3,787 tests by March 18,
330 positive cases.
Positive rate: 8.7%
Clearly Guangdong did more testing with respect to its epidemic than Iceland.
Let's look at New York State:
172,360 tests by March 29,
59513 positive cases
Positive rate: 34.5%