Seeing a lot of this circulating on the right, so let me explain why folks are worried even though it is not literally true that every ICU bed in the country is occupied at the moment.
#1, the big worry is ICU space, not hospital beds, and as you can see from this very thread, ICU utilization is running well above hospital utilization generally.
#2 The constraint on ICUs isn't beds, it's staff. ICU beds are (relatively) easy to build. They're not much good if the only people you have to staff them are the cafeteria workers.
#3 It's true that ICUs can flex to deal with high utilization. But to do so, they have to:
1) Stretch existing workers to do more (potentially compromising care) 2) Recruit workers from other specialties (potentially compromising care) 2) Hire additional temporary workers
Hiring temps is the best strategy. The problem is, it's a good strategy that's hard to implement when a staggering fraction of the nation's hospitals are all having the same problems, requiring exactly the same skills from the same shrinking pool of workers, at the same time.
#4 This is all further complicated by the fact that this is a novel coronavirus, so your workers--the very people you're expecting to help you flex above normal capacity--are falling sick in droves. And staying sick, because ...
#5 One of the qualities that sets covid-19 apart from the flu is its staying power. Of course, some people just shrug it off (my Dad never even ran a fever!). But people who get sick are often out for weeks.
Of course, the patients also stay sick longer, which brings us to ...
#6 The beds don't turn as fast as ICUs are used to. People who get covid-19 can stay very ill for a long time.
That's very worrying because we might be 3 weeks from peak infections, & over a month from peak hospitalizations--falling as beds are still tied up w/Thanksgiving cases
#7 Especially a problem because--contra the frequent conservative assertions--covid-19 doesn't pay nearly as well as other stuff that hospitals could be doing with those beds, so on top of operations overload they're also having a fiscal crisis as elective surgeries crater.
#8 This is a constant theme in this pandemic: the lag sucks. Everything happens with a substantial lag; hospital admins are often worrying, not about the problems they have now, but the ones they'll have in 3 weeks that are already baked into the cake.
When covid cases are growing, you can temporarily score political points by pointing to things not being that bad right at this instant, if you ignore the lag--the hospitalizations and deaths that are now inevitable but haven't yet happened. But this doesn't make any sense.
If you are talking about a rapidly growing epidemic, and your analysis focuses only on the instant, without accounting for significant lags and quasi-exponential growth, then you are not making a serious critique; you are engaged in a very stupid personal hobby.
Now, of course, I am not saying that all the hospitals will topple--many won't, regardless, and possibly transmission has peaked. Epidemic dynamics are hard to model that finely.
But hospital admins should worry that it's still growing, because that's sure what the graphs suggest. Nor are journalists dumb for reporting that hospitals are under severe strain, because they absolutely are, as you can ascertain by talking to them.
#9 Exhaustion is another major worry. It's one thing to surge for three weeks. It's another to surge for three months. Staff get exhausted, they make mistakes, patients die, they themselves are more likely to make mistakes with PPE and get sick--or run out of supplies.
This is something that hospitals have to plan for, and it's never been more challenging, because these aren't regional emergencies, they're national emergencies.
An emergency too many people wish away by staring hard at isolated statistics & saying "I don't see a problem."
There are reasonable arguments about how bad this will be, whether behavior changes will drive caseloads lower or Xmas/NYE will supercharge them, etc.
There are not reasonable arguments that doctors, administrators and journalists are all lying & everything is secretly awesome.
Now I remain agnostic as to whether the next few months will be seared into American memory as the worst medical disaster of all time, or some more modest level of disaster. But these just aren't the right statistics with which to address that question.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I sort of think that people still have a fundamentally cinematic view of pandemics--it is either the Walking Dead, or everything is basically fine. And on the health care side, they imagine labor shortages can be solved with a fundamentally 19th c surge of unskilled "nurses".
Giving a severely ill covid patient anything other than palliative care is a skilled endeavor--there's a lot of technology, including stuff you really, really need to get right like medication dosage and ventilator settings. This isn't Scarlett O'Hara mopping brows.
You don't acquire that kind of knowledge in a four-hour orientation, even if overworked and exhausted staff had time to give it. So to a first approximation, we're going into the second wave with the same amount of staff we had in the first.
I'm back to writing almost exclusively about the pandemic, often with no very obvious political valence--how to think about testing, what sorts of things might change as a result.
One thing I've noticed is that many readers get really angry when I *don't* make it political.
It's like they cannot conceive of ever wanting to write about the pandemic through any other lens except Donald Trump's failures (Which are many! I have written about them!) They interpret any attempt to speak about anything else as some sort of crude attempt to evade The Truth.
The last nine months should have demonstrated that there's a lot of ruin left in our nation. If China cut off our supply, electronics would be scarce and expensive for a while, and then we'd build chip fabs here. We would not turn into Argentina.
There are plenty of ways America could enter permanent decline. "Can't figure out how to domestically manufacture semiconductors" seems very unlikely to be among them.
To expand on this thought: this is kind of a variant on what that Japanese managed in WWII, getting their hands on pretty much the entire global rubber supply. (Fun fact: we rationed gasoline less because it was scarce than because TIRES were scarce & rationing gas reduced wear)
I didn't like Hillbilly Elegy, the Movie nearly as much as the book. However: I watched it right after Queen's Gambit. And while QG is objectively better written/styled, I found myself thinking about it a lot, while QG dissolved like the cotton candy it is.
I've been wondering why that is. Part of it, undoubtedly, is that HE had the same struggle as all memoirs: real lives don't have clear plots. (Or rather they have too much; Howard struggled to pick out one clean thread.) But the people felt real, particularly Close/Adams.
QG, by contrast, was a superficial gloss that scrubbed away all the actual deep struggles of being neuroatypical and turned the protagonist into a too-pretty Mary Sue whom everyone leaps to help despite the fact that she's kind of miserable to be around.
Confronted with the past remarks of Clinton and Abrams, large portions of lefty twitter have started insisted that Trump's major violation is the lawsuit--which is the most normal, acceptable thing he is doing. It's his extrajudicial activities that are unprecedented and horrific
The problem is not that Trump is going to court. The problem is that he is stating, as a fact, that a vast electoral fraud occurred in order to avoid admitting he lost the election by the rules then in place for holding the election.
(And also that this vast electoral fraud did not occur, or if we want to go all "You can't prove a negative", that he has offered no good evidence it did.)
The duty to concede is separate from the structure of the system, in a way too few people seem to be appreciating.
So Democrats are going to be tempted to be quiet about the prior antics of Hillary Clinton and Stacey Abrams, on the (absolutely true) grounds that what Trump is doing is so much worse, and how dare you take the focus off him?
Understandable instinct, but a disastrous mistake.
The correct move here, both politically and ethically, is to utterly repudiate those earlier, dangerous flirtations with refusing to accept the legitimacy of a democratic election, and do your best to force the perpetrators to do so as well.
Undercut the best rejoinder Republicans have, which is that Democrats don't care about the norms of democratic legitimacy, and will hypocritically tolerate abuses from their own side.