4 ms·

I looked at the chart you linked. I don't see how you can draw any conclusions from it, as each country has different testing and death reporting. Also, the U

I looked at the chart you linked. I don't see how you can draw any conclusions from it, as each country has different testing and death reporting. Also, the USA contains many cities and large rural areas, so the rates would be different. But most importantly, regardless of how the graph is interpreted, it doesn't answer any questions, such as: - when should we stop social distancing? forever isn't an answer. - do ventilators help or not? - how much testing do we need to do? tracing? To conclude, I think you're confusing data with information.

JoeAltmaier 7y ago
I thought ventilators were pretty much a given - a 50% or better survival rate when needed. They give treatment the time to work. If used when treatment options are exhausted, then they simply prolong life a few days (and suffering) so there's that I suppose.
- redis_mlc 7y ago
  No. The numbers are 66% to 90% mortality rate (NY is 80%) on ventilators, and the survivors can't talk or climb a flight of stairs for an unknown amount of time. The current recommendation is to use a cannula with an oxygen bottle as long as possible (until the patient can't stop fainting.) There is no treatment yet. Your body can use the first week to try and recover itself, but after that most people die. From a public health policy, ventilators don't work, so they're not really part of the equation now as they were in March. What's misunderstood about ventilators is that being intubated requires general sedation and is more like major surgery than assistance.
tomohawk 7y ago
Why would I look at a chart like this to answer whether ventilators help or not? Rhetorically dismissing data such as this does not get us anywhere. Just because it doesn't answer the questions you pose does not mean it doesn't give us insight, in the aggregate, as to how the disease is progressing in different countries. To conclude, I think you're confusing rhetoric for logic.

JoeAltmaier 7y ago

I thought ventilators were pretty much a given - a 50% or better survival rate when needed. They give treatment the time to work. If used when treatment options are exhausted, then they simply prolong life a few days (and suffering) so there's that I suppose.

redis_mlc 7y ago
No. The numbers are 66% to 90% mortality rate (NY is 80%) on ventilators, and the survivors can't talk or climb a flight of stairs for an unknown amount of time. The current recommendation is to use a cannula with an oxygen bottle as long as possible (until the patient can't stop fainting.) There is no treatment yet. Your body can use the first week to try and recover itself, but after that most people die. From a public health policy, ventilators don't work, so they're not really part of the equation now as they were in March. What's misunderstood about ventilators is that being intubated requires general sedation and is more like major surgery than assistance.

tomohawk 7y ago

Why would I look at a chart like this to answer whether ventilators help or not? Rhetorically dismissing data such as this does not get us anywhere. Just because it doesn't answer the questions you pose does not mean it doesn't give us insight, in the aggregate, as to how the disease is progressing in different countries. To conclude, I think you're confusing rhetoric for logic.