Quote:
Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins
You don't want it at 100% when you don't have a limitless supply of therapeutics and providers. Just because the hospitals weren't filled to capacity didn't mean that providers weren't using garbage bags and ponchos as PPE, and that they weren't using third and fourth line induction and sedation agents instead of first line agents. That means more trips into the rooms, more exposure, more PPE use, and more burn on the system in a time where pharmaceuticals are already difficult to acquire due to shutdowns.
The point wasn't to redline the system, because herd immunity wasn't the goal. The goal was and is to limit cases as much as possible because the amount of hospitalizations required to reach herd immunity is too high for the hospital system to sustain it. There's a reason why surgeons don't schedule 24 hours of surgery a day, but instead spread it over several days--you may clear your cases out faster, but you're putting an unsustainable drag on the provider
If these numbers hold, then it's proof that the distancing measures are working. It's also proof that short of an abject disaster, Leavitt's quote was right: "Everything we do before a pandemic will seem alarmist. Everything we do after will seem inadequate."
|
Then your discussion becomes the definition of 'capacity', then. And the supply issue doesn't seem to be working itself out anyway, despite the fact that we seem to have a lot of PPE in various places that we simply aren't getting to the places that need it. Time doesn't seem likely to solve that (as a nationwide lockdown instead of an organic spread has anyplace that HAS spare equipment holding onto it like grim death).
Moreover, we have little evidence yet that medical providers are being hit inordinately hard right now due to a lack of PPE. The situation on the ground appears to be that things aren't ideal, but they also aren't critical. Yes, some healthcare providers are contracting it, but compare their rates to transit workers or retail workers and they're not out of line (especially when compared to the rates of exposure).
They're pushing equipment right to the edge of its functional envelope, but the results thus far aren't that they're not being protected at all because of that. They're using every inch of runway in most cases, but there's still little indication that planes are driving off the edge. If outcomes have been worse because of these shortages, it's a damn small amount. Which again gets back to the definition of capacity - isn't that consideration baked into the cake already?