You don’t have the information to do any figuring.
You don’t know how many cases there are. There could be 5 times, 10 times, 50 times as many as the 10,445.
In a way it is testing that is screwing things up. Consider if the epidemic were managed in the way epidemics BEFORE testing were. Every positive case would depend on a clinician’s diagnosis (which, for my money is better than any test). There really would be almost NO “False Positives” because the patients don’t come to attention until they have symptoms. During an epidemic the Symptoms (that patients complain of) and the Signs (Things Physicians notice) would give you a very accurate # of “those infected” lacking only those that had yet to have symptoms because the clinician would very rapidly become very good at recognizing something he is seeing multiple times a day.
Traditionally those lacking symptoms as yet are traced through contact tracking and as they begin to have symptoms they get added to the list.
So what has been added to the “old way”? Tests. And the lack of understanding about what those test results mean, how accurate are they, and a # of other factors just confuses everything. Particularly “modeling” but in a large event like this some “modeling” really is required to match the logistics of resources to the demand. Sounds to me like maybe they let “testing” get out of hand. But then I am an old clinician. What do I know?