22 ms·

That's a somewhat cynical take, and I don't think any public policymakers would agree with your framing. What you're saying amounts to "We don't need more vent

That's a somewhat cynical take, and I don't think any public policymakers would agree with your framing. What you're saying amounts to "We don't need more ventilators because all those people are probably going to die anyway and it won't save many lives." A better reason is because we beat the outbreak. A few areas like Milan/Madrid/Brussels went past their health care capacity and could have used more hardware. But they're all past peak now, and everywhere else (almost -- there are a few worrisome spots in the US still growing, and the developing world is still a big question mark due to lack of testing) managed to reach peak without hitting their limit. That's good news. We won. It's certainly not a problem that some of the efforts turned out not to be needed. It's like a war effort: everyone had a part to play, we needed to be conservative with our risk analysis and try different things.

nichohel 7y ago
I said nothing even approximately like "all those people are probably going to die anyway" and that is not, in fact, what I think! It is offensive that you would make up something like that and claim that is what I said. What a growing number of doctors are saying is that ventilators often turn out to do more harm than good in treating COVID, ventilators have been used too soon and too often in treating COVID, and ventilators have probably resulted in excess deaths over alternative treatments.
- newacct583 7y ago
  I apologize if I offended you. That certainly seemed like what you were saying. The take is not new, and has been circulating among the "open up" community for a while. As far as whether ventilators have "probably resulted in excess deaths"... that's just not justified by any science yet. We don't know. There's some suspicion in that direction, based mostly on New York ICU fatality rates (which are quite high despite otherwise good numbers through the rest of the process). But there's equally good evidence from e.g. Milan, which experienced very high death rates due presumptively to lack of treatment hardware.
jplayer01 7y ago
You've completely misunderstood his argument. It's widely accepted and known that fatality rates once you're put on a ventilator (due to Coronavirus) is ridiculously high compared to when you're put on a ventilator for other illnesses (something like 80% vs 20%). It suggests that ventilators might not be the right solution to what's happening to these people. So some doctors have been questioning the wisdom of continuing to use ventilators, and some doctors have been looking to alternative solutions that might have more success and better outcomes. One idea that was floated was CPAP (though I don't know what happened to that). Nobody here is saying "ah, ventilators aren't working, fuck it, let everybody die". That's offensive to everybody here and a bad faith argument that isn't constructive in any way.
- sandGorgon 7y ago
  Prone positioning seems to be helping a lot https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/14/health/coronavirus-prone-positioning/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/14/health/coronavirus-prone-posi...
- newacct583 7y ago
  The 80% number is from New York. It's not borne out by other regional data. And again, if ventilators don't help someone needs to explain why the death rate in Milan shot through the roof when they ran out of ventilators. We just don't know yet. As for offense: I apologize again. But the "ventilators don't work" take is getting too much traction among people who do make that argument, and IMHO it needs to be shut down. It's not good science. Not yet. Let the doctors do their work.
ineedasername 7y ago
I'm not sure it's accurate to say we "beat the outbreak". First, it's a common opinion among experts that a second wave will emerge. If we declare victory and don't prepare, there's no reason it can't be much worse. Second, at least in the US, it appears things are slowly gaining steam in more rural areas where healthcare is much more thin on the ground. At the same time, there's a push to reopen things, especially in states the skew more towards rural. It might not end up amounting to much, or it could be a disaster in the making, but it's not quite time to say "we won".
- newacct583 7y ago
  So... I agree with all that. It's not over. I just don't think enough attention is paid to just how outrageously bad things looked in late March. At the growth rates we were seeing, we'd have blown right through health care capacity and we'd have been looking at hundreds of thousands of US deaths by the second week of April. And it didn't happen. The growth stopped cold, because the lockdowns worked. That's good news, and needs to be celebrated, so that we can continue the work. Instead, people on the left think "It's still serious!" and refuse to celebrate what we've achieved. And people on the right, not invited to the party, are being led to believe that the lockdowns somehow weren't the victory they actually were. And that's bad. We won the war. The battles aren't over, but we know we can beat this.
  - ineedasername 7y ago
    I don't think you should make an analysis of our progress political. It does a disservice to "people on the right" if you think their opinions on the matter are somehow driven by left-leaning messaging. Such messaging has generally not, on other issues these past few years, done much to move right-leaning opinions. As such, if we're seeing people on the right are affirming opinions that you just "left", it should be much more thoughtfully considered as a legitimate, honest opinion, not one driven primarily by left/right messaging.
    - jshevek 7y ago
      I agree that political generalizations often do a disservice to people on both sides, who often have their views caricaturized. When you say don't "make... political" do you agree that the cultural trends exist and are worthy of discussion in a conversation about handling the disease?

nichohel 7y ago

I said nothing even approximately like "all those people are probably going to die anyway" and that is not, in fact, what I think! It is offensive that you would make up something like that and claim that is what I said. What a growing number of doctors are saying is that ventilators often turn out to do more harm than good in treating COVID, ventilators have been used too soon and too often in treating COVID, and ventilators have probably resulted in excess deaths over alternative treatments.

newacct583 7y ago
I apologize if I offended you. That certainly seemed like what you were saying. The take is not new, and has been circulating among the "open up" community for a while. As far as whether ventilators have "probably resulted in excess deaths"... that's just not justified by any science yet. We don't know. There's some suspicion in that direction, based mostly on New York ICU fatality rates (which are quite high despite otherwise good numbers through the rest of the process). But there's equally good evidence from e.g. Milan, which experienced very high death rates due presumptively to lack of treatment hardware.

jplayer01 7y ago

You've completely misunderstood his argument. It's widely accepted and known that fatality rates once you're put on a ventilator (due to Coronavirus) is ridiculously high compared to when you're put on a ventilator for other illnesses (something like 80% vs 20%). It suggests that ventilators might not be the right solution to what's happening to these people. So some doctors have been questioning the wisdom of continuing to use ventilators, and some doctors have been looking to alternative solutions that might have more success and better outcomes. One idea that was floated was CPAP (though I don't know what happened to that). Nobody here is saying "ah, ventilators aren't working, fuck it, let everybody die". That's offensive to everybody here and a bad faith argument that isn't constructive in any way.

sandGorgon 7y ago
Prone positioning seems to be helping a lot https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/14/health/coronavirus-prone-positioning/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/14/health/coronavirus-prone-posi...
newacct583 7y ago
The 80% number is from New York. It's not borne out by other regional data. And again, if ventilators don't help someone needs to explain why the death rate in Milan shot through the roof when they ran out of ventilators. We just don't know yet. As for offense: I apologize again. But the "ventilators don't work" take is getting too much traction among people who do make that argument, and IMHO it needs to be shut down. It's not good science. Not yet. Let the doctors do their work.

ineedasername 7y ago

I'm not sure it's accurate to say we "beat the outbreak". First, it's a common opinion among experts that a second wave will emerge. If we declare victory and don't prepare, there's no reason it can't be much worse. Second, at least in the US, it appears things are slowly gaining steam in more rural areas where healthcare is much more thin on the ground. At the same time, there's a push to reopen things, especially in states the skew more towards rural. It might not end up amounting to much, or it could be a disaster in the making, but it's not quite time to say "we won".

newacct583 7y ago
So... I agree with all that. It's not over. I just don't think enough attention is paid to just how outrageously bad things looked in late March. At the growth rates we were seeing, we'd have blown right through health care capacity and we'd have been looking at hundreds of thousands of US deaths by the second week of April. And it didn't happen. The growth stopped cold, because the lockdowns worked. That's good news, and needs to be celebrated, so that we can continue the work. Instead, people on the left think "It's still serious!" and refuse to celebrate what we've achieved. And people on the right, not invited to the party, are being led to believe that the lockdowns somehow weren't the victory they actually were. And that's bad. We won the war. The battles aren't over, but we know we can beat this.
- ineedasername 7y ago
  I don't think you should make an analysis of our progress political. It does a disservice to "people on the right" if you think their opinions on the matter are somehow driven by left-leaning messaging. Such messaging has generally not, on other issues these past few years, done much to move right-leaning opinions. As such, if we're seeing people on the right are affirming opinions that you just "left", it should be much more thoughtfully considered as a legitimate, honest opinion, not one driven primarily by left/right messaging.
  - jshevek 7y ago
    I agree that political generalizations often do a disservice to people on both sides, who often have their views caricaturized. When you say don't "make... political" do you agree that the cultural trends exist and are worthy of discussion in a conversation about handling the disease?