Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
It goes beyond that even. Staff that work for Openreach are getting abused in the street as well.
Openreach are responsible for maintaining the fixed line infrastructure for broadband etc and have nothing to do with mobile phone technology at all.
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
Azreal13 wrote: It goes beyond that even. Staff that work for Openreach are getting abused in the street as well.
Openreach are responsible for maintaining the fixed line infrastructure for broadband etc and have nothing to do with mobile phone technology at all.
I don't know what to say, except after this whole crisis we ought to look at our education system and how governments / companies interact with the public....
Also in regards to noble lies, these oughta stop.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/04/04 19:42:52
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
It's nothing to do with education. Almost every human in the developed world has a device in their pocket that allows them access to the sum total of humanity's knowledge, they can check the facts in seconds. These people refuse to be educated, because an unfortunate side effect of being stupid is the total lack of comprehension of the fact you are stupid.
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
Azreal13 wrote: It's nothing to do with education. Almost every human in the developed world has a device in their pocket that allows them access to the sum total of humanity's knowledge, they can check the facts in seconds. These people refuse to be educated, because an unfortunate side effect of being stupid is the total lack of comprehension of the fact you are stupid.
Not really but then again what i mean is Bildung which translates badly into english because it isn't just education but also in regards to charachter and values.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
Jerram wrote: How'd you arrive at the average since I don't see it in the data ? Did you take into account the various counties populations when calculating that average ? Did you calculate pre brexit since the occupancy numbers are pre brexit ? How did you account for the fact that your data specifically calls out a decrease in the number of beds over time which would most likely result in a higher occupancy rate than the 72% from a different study done in an earlier timeframe. And if you read the comparability section in goes through a litany of differences in how those numbers are calculated in different countries rendering cross country comparison a hazardous activity.
What really jumps out at me about that data is how much S Korea increased in those 17 years, would be interesting to see that broken down by year and see how much of that was tied into the previous SARS outbreak and potential lessons learned.
The other thing that jumps out at me is our friends to the North could be F'd, low beds per capita and over 90% occupancy rate.
You left out the deployables I mentioned, the US basically just added another .5 beds per person (in NYC) which may not seem like much until you realize it was exactly where it was needed.
You average out the 2017 numbers of the EU countries displayed? In that way you don't need to account for population because the beds per 1000 already accounts for that in the average, with patients getting shared across borders. .
This part is incorrect just too demonstrate and keep it simple by your method the average for S Korea and India is 6.4 but when you take into account population and you're somewhere under 1. I wouldn't expect it to be that dramatic but it doesnt need to be to change the comparison.
I'm not talking just beds and a building when I say deployables, I'm talking deployable capability. They're being manned by military personel most likely active duty and reserve.
That is the exact same way the WHO calculates occupancy in your statistics though, pile on the countries and average it out, so occupancy average says nothing about empty beds except for the EU average not accounting for beds per 1000, say the NL is 10% under while another is 10% over average. Yet it is close enough to be a reasonably accurate average. I quickly averaged it because the large countries are about equally divided on either end in the EU (yes plus the UK) in regards to beds, here is the specific number then when taking population and beds per country into account when averaging: about 4.88 per 1000, so 0.02 under the average I quickly did. So that changes virtually nothing to the 25% average of extra beds.
Interesting and you've made a decent argument that the EU overall may have more available bed space, ( I'd need to know in more detail what and was'nt included, still too many questions) but doesn't change the original point that was addressing someone else. The US doesn't have a shortage of beds because private hospitals are evil and minimize all excess capacity, and the detailed data you averaged out supports that (look at some of the countries with fewer beds and higher utilization rates.
Bed space is bigger, just to point out that occupancy matters not as much. But overall bed space is not a great metric anyway. Certain US states will have a better ratio than other, just as EU countries. That doesn't take into account labor laws regarding sick leave and public or private health insurance. Having the bed space versus avoiding using that bed space is much more important. The bigger questions will probably be, how easy is it for sick people to stay at home when thinking they might have the virus and how many people will think they can tough it out or avoid the doctor hoping it is a cold?
I think that is mostly where the private versus public healthcare debate has to fall, the system around it avoiding the usage of beds in the system. Both options can be great, but as Italy shows us, if you get surprised and overwhelmed then beds run out fast regardless.
Disciple of Fate wrote: As for the deployable capability, my argument is still the same. The EU has their armies too, but that capacity runs out. Sure they can triage the hotspots, but when the whole country is affected it gets much harder. There is an effective limit on how much can be expanded upon. That number they can do in NY is not going to be reproducible once the whole country is suffering.
The nation states that make up the EU have militaries yes but no they aren't even on the same planet when it comes to deployable capability, sure everything has an effective limit but its got a way to go as long as we don't burn everything out at once. Talking about the something the size of the entire US getting hammered at the same time is not something we've seen, that would be equivalent to the entire continent of Europe (Not EU, the entire continent) having its peak at once.
Of course the armies of the EU are not as capable, but the question is what defines capable enough? Yes the US military can do great work, but they are as limited by staff and equipment as any other army. Yes in absolute numbers they have vastly more than any individual force here, but they might be needed in more places.
As for the Europe having its peak all at once, of course not. But the US military is deploying a lot of force to NY and LA because of their peaks. But you can see peaks are starting to occur in Florida, Pennsylvania , Louisiana and Michigan, can they deploy there as forcefully at the same time as they are doing now in NY and LA? Even the Pentagon has pointed out that there are limits (from Joint Staff Surgeon Brigadier General P. Friedrichs):
Q: If I could follow up, how much slack is there in sort of the military health system that you can actually provide to the civilian authorities? You know, is -- there's obviously not doctors just lying around who are waiting to go to work, they would presumably come from civilian hospitals. You know, how many respirators do you have sort of lying around? I mean, how much can you actually support if you're asked?
FRIEDRICHS: Yeah, so the -- so those are great questions. And -- and those are the sorts of analyses that we're going through right now to identify what we can do. And -- and I want to emphasize the point that people have come up and said, you know, what about this idea, what about that idea?
We're trying to step through each of those questions that we receive and then say here's what's within the realm of possible. If we do this, then here's the consequence. A great one that's come up is why don't we mobilize the Guard and the Reserve? I think that's what you're talking about right now.
The challenge with that, as you alluded to, is if you mobilize the Guard and Reserve medical personnel from their civilian jobs, they're no longer in their civilian jobs and that directly impacts the community where they work.
And that's the tradeoff that -- you know, whether it's a natural disaster or the coronavirus or anything else, that's part of the tradeoff that we look at as we offer options going forward.
...
Q: And then may I -- sort of follow up, you've mentioned that there was a surge capability for building field hospitals. Can you give us a sense of what those numbers were? Could the military, put up a 500-bed hospital in one of these affected areas in a rapid amount of time?
FRIEDRICHS: So we have -- we have different deployable hospital capability ranging from 25 beds up to much larger than that. I think the largest capability that you've all seen is the hospital ship, which has hundreds of beds on it. And it -- then the question becomes what do they need? The challenge is, as we've mentioned before, if we build a 200-bed or a 25-bed trauma hospital to take care of people with coronavirus, that's not really a great solution to the coronavirus challenge.
And so what we're working through as we participate in discussions is here's what we have, here's what it does very well, which is trauma care and acute care and emergency care, and we have not been tasked to provide those to any specific location, but those are the types of medical capabilities that we have. We don't have any 500-bed hospitals designed for infectious disease outbreaks. That does not exist in the inventory.
That interview was like three weeks ago, that's a lifetime in this conversation, since then the military has provided an additional 2 expeditionary medical facilities and 15 army field hospitals including to some of the places you mentioned and isn't slowing down. Everything he says is true but none of it contradicts what I said. Yes there are challenges (how do you make sure you grab the right people) and it may not be a great solution but we dont need a great solution we need a good enough solution. You still don't get the vast gulf in capabilities and are just thinking of it as a small raw numbers advantage. You want to know when you can tell crap has really hit the fan. Its not when we activate large numbers of the guard and ready reserve. Its when they involuntarily recall large numbers of inactive reserve.
Future War Cultist wrote: Thanks guys. We’re not sure how he managed to hold on (I’m technically hearing all this third hand so I’m not 100%) but I should point out that he’s still in a serious condition. It seems that he has suffered permanent damage, but he’s no longer deteriorating and has levelled out...so far.
Fingers crossed from me. Hope he is past the worst of it and they can keep him stable and comfortable until he can get treatment for the permanent damage it has caused.
The Laws of Thermodynamics:
1) You cannot win. 2) You cannot break even. 3) You cannot stop playing the game.
Colonel Flagg wrote:You think you're real smart. But you're not smart; you're dumb. Very dumb. But you've met your match in me.
Azreal13 wrote: It's nothing to do with education. Almost every human in the developed world has a device in their pocket that allows them access to the sum total of humanity's knowledge, they can check the facts in seconds. These people refuse to be educated, because an unfortunate side effect of being stupid is the total lack of comprehension of the fact you are stupid.
Not really but then again what i mean is Bildung which translates badly into english because it isn't just education but also in regards to charachter and values.
Culture is probably closer. Trouble is, that can't be so easily addressed, and ground up reworking of educational systems is in no way easy. Simply easier than addressing the fundamentals of a society built on centuries of national identity.
Which is not to say I think the UK has a notably bigger problem with idiocy than other nations, I just think it manifests itself in different ways.
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
Jerram wrote: How'd you arrive at the average since I don't see it in the data ? Did you take into account the various counties populations when calculating that average ? Did you calculate pre brexit since the occupancy numbers are pre brexit ? How did you account for the fact that your data specifically calls out a decrease in the number of beds over time which would most likely result in a higher occupancy rate than the 72% from a different study done in an earlier timeframe. And if you read the comparability section in goes through a litany of differences in how those numbers are calculated in different countries rendering cross country comparison a hazardous activity.
What really jumps out at me about that data is how much S Korea increased in those 17 years, would be interesting to see that broken down by year and see how much of that was tied into the previous SARS outbreak and potential lessons learned.
The other thing that jumps out at me is our friends to the North could be F'd, low beds per capita and over 90% occupancy rate.
You left out the deployables I mentioned, the US basically just added another .5 beds per person (in NYC) which may not seem like much until you realize it was exactly where it was needed.
You average out the 2017 numbers of the EU countries displayed? In that way you don't need to account for population because the beds per 1000 already accounts for that in the average, with patients getting shared across borders. .
This part is incorrect just too demonstrate and keep it simple by your method the average for S Korea and India is 6.4 but when you take into account population and you're somewhere under 1. I wouldn't expect it to be that dramatic but it doesnt need to be to change the comparison.
I'm not talking just beds and a building when I say deployables, I'm talking deployable capability. They're being manned by military personel most likely active duty and reserve.
That is the exact same way the WHO calculates occupancy in your statistics though, pile on the countries and average it out, so occupancy average says nothing about empty beds except for the EU average not accounting for beds per 1000, say the NL is 10% under while another is 10% over average. Yet it is close enough to be a reasonably accurate average. I quickly averaged it because the large countries are about equally divided on either end in the EU (yes plus the UK) in regards to beds, here is the specific number then when taking population and beds per country into account when averaging: about 4.88 per 1000, so 0.02 under the average I quickly did. So that changes virtually nothing to the 25% average of extra beds.
Interesting and you've made a decent argument that the EU overall may have more available bed space, ( I'd need to know in more detail what and was'nt included, still too many questions) but doesn't change the original point that was addressing someone else. The US doesn't have a shortage of beds because private hospitals are evil and minimize all excess capacity, and the detailed data you averaged out supports that (look at some of the countries with fewer beds and higher utilization rates.
Bed space is bigger, just to point out that occupancy matters not as much. But overall bed space is not a great metric anyway. Certain US states will have a better ratio than other, just as EU countries. That doesn't take into account labor laws regarding sick leave and public or private health insurance. Having the bed space versus avoiding using that bed space is much more important. The bigger questions will probably be, how easy is it for sick people to stay at home when thinking they might have the virus and how many people will think they can tough it out or avoid the doctor hoping it is a cold?
I think that is mostly where the private versus public healthcare debate has to fall, the system around it avoiding the usage of beds in the system. Both options can be great, but as Italy shows us, if you get surprised and overwhelmed then beds run out fast regardless.
Disciple of Fate wrote: As for the deployable capability, my argument is still the same. The EU has their armies too, but that capacity runs out. Sure they can triage the hotspots, but when the whole country is affected it gets much harder. There is an effective limit on how much can be expanded upon. That number they can do in NY is not going to be reproducible once the whole country is suffering.
The nation states that make up the EU have militaries yes but no they aren't even on the same planet when it comes to deployable capability, sure everything has an effective limit but its got a way to go as long as we don't burn everything out at once. Talking about the something the size of the entire US getting hammered at the same time is not something we've seen, that would be equivalent to the entire continent of Europe (Not EU, the entire continent) having its peak at once.
Of course the armies of the EU are not as capable, but the question is what defines capable enough? Yes the US military can do great work, but they are as limited by staff and equipment as any other army. Yes in absolute numbers they have vastly more than any individual force here, but they might be needed in more places.
As for the Europe having its peak all at once, of course not. But the US military is deploying a lot of force to NY and LA because of their peaks. But you can see peaks are starting to occur in Florida, Pennsylvania , Louisiana and Michigan, can they deploy there as forcefully at the same time as they are doing now in NY and LA? Even the Pentagon has pointed out that there are limits (from Joint Staff Surgeon Brigadier General P. Friedrichs):
Q: If I could follow up, how much slack is there in sort of the military health system that you can actually provide to the civilian authorities? You know, is -- there's obviously not doctors just lying around who are waiting to go to work, they would presumably come from civilian hospitals. You know, how many respirators do you have sort of lying around? I mean, how much can you actually support if you're asked?
FRIEDRICHS: Yeah, so the -- so those are great questions. And -- and those are the sorts of analyses that we're going through right now to identify what we can do. And -- and I want to emphasize the point that people have come up and said, you know, what about this idea, what about that idea?
We're trying to step through each of those questions that we receive and then say here's what's within the realm of possible. If we do this, then here's the consequence. A great one that's come up is why don't we mobilize the Guard and the Reserve? I think that's what you're talking about right now.
The challenge with that, as you alluded to, is if you mobilize the Guard and Reserve medical personnel from their civilian jobs, they're no longer in their civilian jobs and that directly impacts the community where they work.
And that's the tradeoff that -- you know, whether it's a natural disaster or the coronavirus or anything else, that's part of the tradeoff that we look at as we offer options going forward.
...
Q: And then may I -- sort of follow up, you've mentioned that there was a surge capability for building field hospitals. Can you give us a sense of what those numbers were? Could the military, put up a 500-bed hospital in one of these affected areas in a rapid amount of time?
FRIEDRICHS: So we have -- we have different deployable hospital capability ranging from 25 beds up to much larger than that. I think the largest capability that you've all seen is the hospital ship, which has hundreds of beds on it. And it -- then the question becomes what do they need? The challenge is, as we've mentioned before, if we build a 200-bed or a 25-bed trauma hospital to take care of people with coronavirus, that's not really a great solution to the coronavirus challenge.
And so what we're working through as we participate in discussions is here's what we have, here's what it does very well, which is trauma care and acute care and emergency care, and we have not been tasked to provide those to any specific location, but those are the types of medical capabilities that we have. We don't have any 500-bed hospitals designed for infectious disease outbreaks. That does not exist in the inventory.
That interview was like three weeks ago, that's a lifetime in this conversation, since then the military has provided an additional 2 expeditionary medical facilities and 15 army field hospitals including to some of the places you mentioned and isn't slowing down. Everything he says is true but none of it contradicts what I said. Yes there are challenges (how do you make sure you grab the right people) and it may not be a great solution but we dont need a great solution we need a good enough solution. You still don't get the vast gulf in capabilities and are just thinking of it as a small raw numbers advantage. You want to know when you can tell crap has really hit the fan. Its not when we activate large numbers of the guard and ready reserve. Its when they involuntarily recall large numbers of inactive reserve.
I'm not sure why you're arguing with the words of the DoD itself, 3 weeks might be a lifetime, but you can't conjure up capability from thin air and these people are exactly the ones who would know. In there they even say they have the capabilities that were later deployed as you point out, that was already taken into account. Fact remains that yes, the military can help, but their is a limit to how much they can do with the personnel they have and the equipment available. The US military has several thousand doctors in service, any more and they need to start harvesting the national guard and reserve, but those will already be working in civilian hospitals and needed there during the pandemic. I get the capabilities, I also get that those capabilities adhere to logistical and personnel problems just as much as the civilian side when you're talking about something this massive. When services start getting overwhelmed, you're talking about a raw numbers approach, because in the end people are only able to do so much regardless of resources given.
Azreal13 wrote: It's nothing to do with education. Almost every human in the developed world has a device in their pocket that allows them access to the sum total of humanity's knowledge, they can check the facts in seconds. These people refuse to be educated, because an unfortunate side effect of being stupid is the total lack of comprehension of the fact you are stupid.
Not really but then again what i mean is Bildung which translates badly into english because it isn't just education but also in regards to charachter and values.
Culture is probably closer. Trouble is, that can't be so easily addressed, and ground up reworking of educational systems is in no way easy. Simply easier than addressing the fundamentals of a society built on centuries of national identity.
Which is not to say I think the UK has a notably bigger problem with idiocy than other nations, I just think it manifests itself in different ways.
Problem is that, some people, no matter how smart or educated can still be led astray so to speak. In the case of these people, we have no idea what their education level is. Having a degree sometimes means little for that person's grasp on reality or rationality. This sort of stupidity has always and likely will always exist.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2020/04/04 20:29:16
Sorry for my spelling. I'm not a native speaker and a dyslexic.
1750 pts Blood Specters
2000 pts Imperial Fists
6000 pts Disciples of Fate
3500 pts Peridia Prime
2500 pts Prophets of Fate
Lizardmen 3000 points Tlaxcoatl Temple-City
Tomb Kings 1500 points Sekhra (RIP)
Ima going to bet that people setting fire to phone masts aren't in the A,B or C socio economic demographics.
When your spokesperson is Amanda Holden (who, let us not forget, asked Tim Peake if he'd brought any moon rock back from the ISS) you can make certain assumptions pretty safely.
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
Jerram wrote: How'd you arrive at the average since I don't see it in the data ? Did you take into account the various counties populations when calculating that average ? Did you calculate pre brexit since the occupancy numbers are pre brexit ? How did you account for the fact that your data specifically calls out a decrease in the number of beds over time which would most likely result in a higher occupancy rate than the 72% from a different study done in an earlier timeframe. And if you read the comparability section in goes through a litany of differences in how those numbers are calculated in different countries rendering cross country comparison a hazardous activity.
What really jumps out at me about that data is how much S Korea increased in those 17 years, would be interesting to see that broken down by year and see how much of that was tied into the previous SARS outbreak and potential lessons learned.
The other thing that jumps out at me is our friends to the North could be F'd, low beds per capita and over 90% occupancy rate.
You left out the deployables I mentioned, the US basically just added another .5 beds per person (in NYC) which may not seem like much until you realize it was exactly where it was needed.
You average out the 2017 numbers of the EU countries displayed? In that way you don't need to account for population because the beds per 1000 already accounts for that in the average, with patients getting shared across borders. .
This part is incorrect just too demonstrate and keep it simple by your method the average for S Korea and India is 6.4 but when you take into account population and you're somewhere under 1. I wouldn't expect it to be that dramatic but it doesnt need to be to change the comparison.
I'm not talking just beds and a building when I say deployables, I'm talking deployable capability. They're being manned by military personel most likely active duty and reserve.
That is the exact same way the WHO calculates occupancy in your statistics though, pile on the countries and average it out, so occupancy average says nothing about empty beds except for the EU average not accounting for beds per 1000, say the NL is 10% under while another is 10% over average. Yet it is close enough to be a reasonably accurate average. I quickly averaged it because the large countries are about equally divided on either end in the EU (yes plus the UK) in regards to beds, here is the specific number then when taking population and beds per country into account when averaging: about 4.88 per 1000, so 0.02 under the average I quickly did. So that changes virtually nothing to the 25% average of extra beds.
Interesting and you've made a decent argument that the EU overall may have more available bed space, ( I'd need to know in more detail what and was'nt included, still too many questions) but doesn't change the original point that was addressing someone else. The US doesn't have a shortage of beds because private hospitals are evil and minimize all excess capacity, and the detailed data you averaged out supports that (look at some of the countries with fewer beds and higher utilization rates.
Bed space is bigger, just to point out that occupancy matters not as much. But overall bed space is not a great metric anyway. Certain US states will have a better ratio than other, just as EU countries. That doesn't take into account labor laws regarding sick leave and public or private health insurance. Having the bed space versus avoiding using that bed space is much more important. The bigger questions will probably be, how easy is it for sick people to stay at home when thinking they might have the virus and how many people will think they can tough it out or avoid the doctor hoping it is a cold?
I think that is mostly where the private versus public healthcare debate has to fall, the system around it avoiding the usage of beds in the system. Both options can be great, but as Italy shows us, if you get surprised and overwhelmed then beds run out fast regardless.
Disciple of Fate wrote: As for the deployable capability, my argument is still the same. The EU has their armies too, but that capacity runs out. Sure they can triage the hotspots, but when the whole country is affected it gets much harder. There is an effective limit on how much can be expanded upon. That number they can do in NY is not going to be reproducible once the whole country is suffering.
The nation states that make up the EU have militaries yes but no they aren't even on the same planet when it comes to deployable capability, sure everything has an effective limit but its got a way to go as long as we don't burn everything out at once. Talking about the something the size of the entire US getting hammered at the same time is not something we've seen, that would be equivalent to the entire continent of Europe (Not EU, the entire continent) having its peak at once.
Of course the armies of the EU are not as capable, but the question is what defines capable enough? Yes the US military can do great work, but they are as limited by staff and equipment as any other army. Yes in absolute numbers they have vastly more than any individual force here, but they might be needed in more places.
As for the Europe having its peak all at once, of course not. But the US military is deploying a lot of force to NY and LA because of their peaks. But you can see peaks are starting to occur in Florida, Pennsylvania , Louisiana and Michigan, can they deploy there as forcefully at the same time as they are doing now in NY and LA? Even the Pentagon has pointed out that there are limits (from Joint Staff Surgeon Brigadier General P. Friedrichs):
Q: If I could follow up, how much slack is there in sort of the military health system that you can actually provide to the civilian authorities? You know, is -- there's obviously not doctors just lying around who are waiting to go to work, they would presumably come from civilian hospitals. You know, how many respirators do you have sort of lying around? I mean, how much can you actually support if you're asked?
FRIEDRICHS: Yeah, so the -- so those are great questions. And -- and those are the sorts of analyses that we're going through right now to identify what we can do. And -- and I want to emphasize the point that people have come up and said, you know, what about this idea, what about that idea?
We're trying to step through each of those questions that we receive and then say here's what's within the realm of possible. If we do this, then here's the consequence. A great one that's come up is why don't we mobilize the Guard and the Reserve? I think that's what you're talking about right now.
The challenge with that, as you alluded to, is if you mobilize the Guard and Reserve medical personnel from their civilian jobs, they're no longer in their civilian jobs and that directly impacts the community where they work.
And that's the tradeoff that -- you know, whether it's a natural disaster or the coronavirus or anything else, that's part of the tradeoff that we look at as we offer options going forward.
...
Q: And then may I -- sort of follow up, you've mentioned that there was a surge capability for building field hospitals. Can you give us a sense of what those numbers were? Could the military, put up a 500-bed hospital in one of these affected areas in a rapid amount of time?
FRIEDRICHS: So we have -- we have different deployable hospital capability ranging from 25 beds up to much larger than that. I think the largest capability that you've all seen is the hospital ship, which has hundreds of beds on it. And it -- then the question becomes what do they need? The challenge is, as we've mentioned before, if we build a 200-bed or a 25-bed trauma hospital to take care of people with coronavirus, that's not really a great solution to the coronavirus challenge.
And so what we're working through as we participate in discussions is here's what we have, here's what it does very well, which is trauma care and acute care and emergency care, and we have not been tasked to provide those to any specific location, but those are the types of medical capabilities that we have. We don't have any 500-bed hospitals designed for infectious disease outbreaks. That does not exist in the inventory.
That interview was like three weeks ago, that's a lifetime in this conversation, since then the military has provided an additional 2 expeditionary medical facilities and 15 army field hospitals including to some of the places you mentioned and isn't slowing down. Everything he says is true but none of it contradicts what I said. Yes there are challenges (how do you make sure you grab the right people) and it may not be a great solution but we don't need a great solution we need a good enough solution. You still don't get the vast gulf in capabilities and are just thinking of it as a small raw numbers advantage. You want to know when you can tell crap has really hit the fan. Its not when we activate large numbers of the guard and ready reserve. Its when they involuntarily recall large numbers of inactive reserve.
I'm not sure why you're arguing with the words of the DoD itself, 3 weeks might be a lifetime, but you can't conjure up capability from thin air and these people are exactly the ones who would know. In there they even say they have the capabilities that were later deployed as you point out, that was already taken into account. Fact remains that yes, the military can help, but their is a limit to how much they can do with the personnel they have and the equipment available. The US military has several thousand doctors in service, any more and they need to start harvesting the national guard and reserve, but those will already be working in civilian hospitals and needed there during the pandemic. I get the capabilities, I also get that those capabilities adhere to logistical and personnel problems just as much as the civilian side when you're talking about something this massive. When services start getting overwhelmed, you're talking about a raw numbers approach, because in the end people are only able to do so much regardless of resources given.
I'm not arguing with the DoD, Im translating American Military to European Civilian, so what is your point, it doesn't matter what the capabilities are there will always be a breaking point, well no duh, but its a lot farther away than you think it to be.
Jerram wrote: How'd you arrive at the average since I don't see it in the data ? Did you take into account the various counties populations when calculating that average ? Did you calculate pre brexit since the occupancy numbers are pre brexit ? How did you account for the fact that your data specifically calls out a decrease in the number of beds over time which would most likely result in a higher occupancy rate than the 72% from a different study done in an earlier timeframe. And if you read the comparability section in goes through a litany of differences in how those numbers are calculated in different countries rendering cross country comparison a hazardous activity.
What really jumps out at me about that data is how much S Korea increased in those 17 years, would be interesting to see that broken down by year and see how much of that was tied into the previous SARS outbreak and potential lessons learned.
The other thing that jumps out at me is our friends to the North could be F'd, low beds per capita and over 90% occupancy rate.
You left out the deployables I mentioned, the US basically just added another .5 beds per person (in NYC) which may not seem like much until you realize it was exactly where it was needed.
You average out the 2017 numbers of the EU countries displayed? In that way you don't need to account for population because the beds per 1000 already accounts for that in the average, with patients getting shared across borders. .
This part is incorrect just too demonstrate and keep it simple by your method the average for S Korea and India is 6.4 but when you take into account population and you're somewhere under 1. I wouldn't expect it to be that dramatic but it doesnt need to be to change the comparison.
I'm not talking just beds and a building when I say deployables, I'm talking deployable capability. They're being manned by military personel most likely active duty and reserve.
That is the exact same way the WHO calculates occupancy in your statistics though, pile on the countries and average it out, so occupancy average says nothing about empty beds except for the EU average not accounting for beds per 1000, say the NL is 10% under while another is 10% over average. Yet it is close enough to be a reasonably accurate average. I quickly averaged it because the large countries are about equally divided on either end in the EU (yes plus the UK) in regards to beds, here is the specific number then when taking population and beds per country into account when averaging: about 4.88 per 1000, so 0.02 under the average I quickly did. So that changes virtually nothing to the 25% average of extra beds.
Interesting and you've made a decent argument that the EU overall may have more available bed space, ( I'd need to know in more detail what and was'nt included, still too many questions) but doesn't change the original point that was addressing someone else. The US doesn't have a shortage of beds because private hospitals are evil and minimize all excess capacity, and the detailed data you averaged out supports that (look at some of the countries with fewer beds and higher utilization rates.
Bed space is bigger, just to point out that occupancy matters not as much. But overall bed space is not a great metric anyway. Certain US states will have a better ratio than other, just as EU countries. That doesn't take into account labor laws regarding sick leave and public or private health insurance. Having the bed space versus avoiding using that bed space is much more important. The bigger questions will probably be, how easy is it for sick people to stay at home when thinking they might have the virus and how many people will think they can tough it out or avoid the doctor hoping it is a cold?
I think that is mostly where the private versus public healthcare debate has to fall, the system around it avoiding the usage of beds in the system. Both options can be great, but as Italy shows us, if you get surprised and overwhelmed then beds run out fast regardless.
Disciple of Fate wrote: As for the deployable capability, my argument is still the same. The EU has their armies too, but that capacity runs out. Sure they can triage the hotspots, but when the whole country is affected it gets much harder. There is an effective limit on how much can be expanded upon. That number they can do in NY is not going to be reproducible once the whole country is suffering.
The nation states that make up the EU have militaries yes but no they aren't even on the same planet when it comes to deployable capability, sure everything has an effective limit but its got a way to go as long as we don't burn everything out at once. Talking about the something the size of the entire US getting hammered at the same time is not something we've seen, that would be equivalent to the entire continent of Europe (Not EU, the entire continent) having its peak at once.
Of course the armies of the EU are not as capable, but the question is what defines capable enough? Yes the US military can do great work, but they are as limited by staff and equipment as any other army. Yes in absolute numbers they have vastly more than any individual force here, but they might be needed in more places.
As for the Europe having its peak all at once, of course not. But the US military is deploying a lot of force to NY and LA because of their peaks. But you can see peaks are starting to occur in Florida, Pennsylvania , Louisiana and Michigan, can they deploy there as forcefully at the same time as they are doing now in NY and LA? Even the Pentagon has pointed out that there are limits (from Joint Staff Surgeon Brigadier General P. Friedrichs):
Q: If I could follow up, how much slack is there in sort of the military health system that you can actually provide to the civilian authorities? You know, is -- there's obviously not doctors just lying around who are waiting to go to work, they would presumably come from civilian hospitals. You know, how many respirators do you have sort of lying around? I mean, how much can you actually support if you're asked?
FRIEDRICHS: Yeah, so the -- so those are great questions. And -- and those are the sorts of analyses that we're going through right now to identify what we can do. And -- and I want to emphasize the point that people have come up and said, you know, what about this idea, what about that idea?
We're trying to step through each of those questions that we receive and then say here's what's within the realm of possible. If we do this, then here's the consequence. A great one that's come up is why don't we mobilize the Guard and the Reserve? I think that's what you're talking about right now.
The challenge with that, as you alluded to, is if you mobilize the Guard and Reserve medical personnel from their civilian jobs, they're no longer in their civilian jobs and that directly impacts the community where they work.
And that's the tradeoff that -- you know, whether it's a natural disaster or the coronavirus or anything else, that's part of the tradeoff that we look at as we offer options going forward.
...
Q: And then may I -- sort of follow up, you've mentioned that there was a surge capability for building field hospitals. Can you give us a sense of what those numbers were? Could the military, put up a 500-bed hospital in one of these affected areas in a rapid amount of time?
FRIEDRICHS: So we have -- we have different deployable hospital capability ranging from 25 beds up to much larger than that. I think the largest capability that you've all seen is the hospital ship, which has hundreds of beds on it. And it -- then the question becomes what do they need? The challenge is, as we've mentioned before, if we build a 200-bed or a 25-bed trauma hospital to take care of people with coronavirus, that's not really a great solution to the coronavirus challenge.
And so what we're working through as we participate in discussions is here's what we have, here's what it does very well, which is trauma care and acute care and emergency care, and we have not been tasked to provide those to any specific location, but those are the types of medical capabilities that we have. We don't have any 500-bed hospitals designed for infectious disease outbreaks. That does not exist in the inventory.
That interview was like three weeks ago, that's a lifetime in this conversation, since then the military has provided an additional 2 expeditionary medical facilities and 15 army field hospitals including to some of the places you mentioned and isn't slowing down. Everything he says is true but none of it contradicts what I said. Yes there are challenges (how do you make sure you grab the right people) and it may not be a great solution but we don't need a great solution we need a good enough solution. You still don't get the vast gulf in capabilities and are just thinking of it as a small raw numbers advantage. You want to know when you can tell crap has really hit the fan. Its not when we activate large numbers of the guard and ready reserve. Its when they involuntarily recall large numbers of inactive reserve.
I'm not sure why you're arguing with the words of the DoD itself, 3 weeks might be a lifetime, but you can't conjure up capability from thin air and these people are exactly the ones who would know. In there they even say they have the capabilities that were later deployed as you point out, that was already taken into account. Fact remains that yes, the military can help, but their is a limit to how much they can do with the personnel they have and the equipment available. The US military has several thousand doctors in service, any more and they need to start harvesting the national guard and reserve, but those will already be working in civilian hospitals and needed there during the pandemic. I get the capabilities, I also get that those capabilities adhere to logistical and personnel problems just as much as the civilian side when you're talking about something this massive. When services start getting overwhelmed, you're talking about a raw numbers approach, because in the end people are only able to do so much regardless of resources given.
I'm not arguing with the DoD, Im translating American Military to European Civilian, so what is your point, it doesn't matter what the capabilities are there will always be a breaking point, well no duh, but its a lot farther away than you think it to be.
Because a European needs to have any knowledge about the US military translated to them by an American? You're pointing out things as a counterargument that the DoD source already considers, hence the appearance of you arguing with it. I'm not saying the US military is at its breaking point, I'm just saying that even for it, there is a breaking point if things go badly. Yes that breaking point is higher than that of European armies, but should not be overestimated on the scale of the current crisis. When you reach a point like Italy, where all you need is equipment and trained hands to operate it, there is a limit. Hopefully the US will never reach that point anywhere, but NY is looking dicey.
Azreal13 wrote: Ima going to bet that people setting fire to phone masts aren't in the A,B or C socio economic demographics.
When your spokesperson is Amanda Holden (who, let us not forget, asked Tim Peake if he'd brought any moon rock back from the ISS) you can make certain assumptions pretty safely.
True, but this isn't the only stupid thing, although it is exceptional in its stupidity.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/04/04 21:25:55
Sorry for my spelling. I'm not a native speaker and a dyslexic.
1750 pts Blood Specters
2000 pts Imperial Fists
6000 pts Disciples of Fate
3500 pts Peridia Prime
2500 pts Prophets of Fate
Lizardmen 3000 points Tlaxcoatl Temple-City
Tomb Kings 1500 points Sekhra (RIP)
Not much to say on the ever growing number of problems facing international society because of this virus, but I now long for one day when you don't wake up to the dreadful news of so many lives being ruthlessly snuffed out.
Yeah but don't feel bad Ive had to translate military to civilian for people who've worked with us. There's often underlying subtext and context to how we phrase things, just like any other profession. Yeah NY worries me.
Wait tell me that moon rock thing is a joke ? Although I guess she's an actress so pfftt, I was a little worried she was a politician when I first saw that.
Jerram wrote: Yeah but don't feel bad Ive had to translate military to civilian for people who've worked with us. There's often underlying subtext and context to how we phrase things, just like any other profession. Yeah NY worries me.
Wait tell me that moon rock thing is a joke ? Although I guess she's an actress so pfftt, I was a little worried she was a politician when I first saw that.
Apparently that moonrock Story wasn't Made up .
Altough why she even believed we got to the Moon is allready an success...
Probably.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/04/04 22:20:15
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
Wait tell me that moon rock thing is a joke ? Although I guess she's an actress so pfftt, I was a little worried she was a politician when I first saw that
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/04/04 22:10:44
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
Azreal13 wrote: It's nothing to do with education. Almost every human in the developed world has a device in their pocket that allows them access to the sum total of humanity's knowledge, they can check the facts in seconds. These people refuse to be educated, because an unfortunate side effect of being stupid is the total lack of comprehension of the fact you are stupid.
Not really but then again what i mean is Bildung which translates badly into english because it isn't just education but also in regards to charachter and values.
Culture is probably closer. Trouble is, that can't be so easily addressed, and ground up reworking of educational systems is in no way easy. Simply easier than addressing the fundamentals of a society built on centuries of national identity.
Which is not to say I think the UK has a notably bigger problem with idiocy than other nations, I just think it manifests itself in different ways.
Any chance we could shoot a couple of Youtube or wotnot tweeny influenza's see if that helps at all,? Back in my day we had to come up with our own stupid
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/04/04 22:50:23
"AND YET YOU ACT AS IF THERE IS SOME IDEAL ORDER IN THE WORLD, AS IF THERE IS SOME...SOME RIGHTNESS IN THE UNIVERSE BY WHICH IT MAY BE JUDGED."
Bran Dawri wrote: On a somewhat related note, the crystals and essential oils quacks are now selling anti-corona stones and other assorted "cures".
No money back if you do catch it despite shelling out $70 for a rock, of course. Then again, if you think a rock at whatever price will stop you from contracting a contagious disease...
Still, if I had my way, these -I don't want to call them people- pond scum would be publically flogged.
Who?
the people buying it? The people selling this junk?
The former are just as much at fault, unless of course you argue that the education system has failed.
The later? Beyond breaking for sure certain guarantee conditions and laws in certain countries one can also assume other laws applicable.
Frankly such people should be forced to publicaly appologize and forced to actually explain why this doesn't work.
I'm going to say the people selling it. Not only are they preying on gullibility, fear and despair which is reprehensible in and of itself, they're convincing their buyers they're "protected", which will lead to those idiots going out, ignoring the quarantines or whatever measures are in place, and endangering others because they've been led to believe they can't be sick.
This I would hold against both parties, but it started with a bunch of frauds trying to make a quick buck without regard for the consequences so the majority of the blame goes their way.
I feel the same way about churches that refused to close/hold online services.
Bran Dawri wrote: On a somewhat related note, the crystals and essential oils quacks are now selling anti-corona stones and other assorted "cures".
No money back if you do catch it despite shelling out $70 for a rock, of course. Then again, if you think a rock at whatever price will stop you from contracting a contagious disease...
Still, if I had my way, these -I don't want to call them people- pond scum would be publically flogged.
Who?
the people buying it? The people selling this junk?
The former are just as much at fault, unless of course you argue that the education system has failed.
The later? Beyond breaking for sure certain guarantee conditions and laws in certain countries one can also assume other laws applicable.
Frankly such people should be forced to publicaly appologize and forced to actually explain why this doesn't work.
I'm going to say the people selling it. Not only are they preying on gullibility, fear and despair which is reprehensible in and of itself, they're convincing their buyers they're "protected", which will lead to those idiots going out, ignoring the quarantines or whatever measures are in place, and endangering others because they've been led to believe they can't be sick.
This I would hold against both parties, but it started with a bunch of frauds trying to make a quick buck without regard for the consequences so the majority of the blame goes their way.
I feel the same way about churches that refused to close/hold online services.
Put another way, they are taking advantage of an opportunity to make money in a society which communicates to people that morality is a consideration but ultimately secondary to profit. They are only doing what their culture says is right to do. While I feel that it is wrong and ultimately pity those involved, I also find it difficult to put significant fault on them.
They also have the ready-made counter argument that the placebo effect is very real and their 'cures' could actually help people in a twisted sort of way. Though that is if they do not actually believe the cures work themselves.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/04/04 23:54:02
I have much less of an issue with people selling the gullible tat they don't need than I do anyone making an excessive profit out of things that are addictive or things that it's difficult or impossible to live without.
People buy gak they don't need all the time, I might as well be the one selling it. I've always done my best to be conscientious, but I have had people standing in front of me that I've told "this thing is objectively better value/superior than this other thing" and been able to back that up with hard data, and still have them take the worst option.
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
Yeah, " all profit, all the time" is probably worse in that it's the underlying cause, but this is a particularly egregious excess. And it still doesn't excuse them setting people up to endanger others. If it was just the quacks and their customers at risk, it'd be far less of an issue to me. You play stupid games, you win stupid prizes. Except it might be someone else winning the stupid prize.
Jerram wrote: How'd you arrive at the average since I don't see it in the data ? Did you take into account the various counties populations when calculating that average ? Did you calculate pre brexit since the occupancy numbers are pre brexit ? How did you account for the fact that your data specifically calls out a decrease in the number of beds over time which would most likely result in a higher occupancy rate than the 72% from a different study done in an earlier timeframe. And if you read the comparability section in goes through a litany of differences in how those numbers are calculated in different countries rendering cross country comparison a hazardous activity.
What really jumps out at me about that data is how much S Korea increased in those 17 years, would be interesting to see that broken down by year and see how much of that was tied into the previous SARS outbreak and potential lessons learned.
The other thing that jumps out at me is our friends to the North could be F'd, low beds per capita and over 90% occupancy rate.
You left out the deployables I mentioned, the US basically just added another .5 beds per person (in NYC) which may not seem like much until you realize it was exactly where it was needed.
You average out the 2017 numbers of the EU countries displayed? In that way you don't need to account for population because the beds per 1000 already accounts for that in the average, with patients getting shared across borders. .
This part is incorrect just too demonstrate and keep it simple by your method the average for S Korea and India is 6.4 but when you take into account population and you're somewhere under 1. I wouldn't expect it to be that dramatic but it doesnt need to be to change the comparison.
I'm not talking just beds and a building when I say deployables, I'm talking deployable capability. They're being manned by military personel most likely active duty and reserve.
That is the exact same way the WHO calculates occupancy in your statistics though, pile on the countries and average it out, so occupancy average says nothing about empty beds except for the EU average not accounting for beds per 1000, say the NL is 10% under while another is 10% over average. Yet it is close enough to be a reasonably accurate average. I quickly averaged it because the large countries are about equally divided on either end in the EU (yes plus the UK) in regards to beds, here is the specific number then when taking population and beds per country into account when averaging: about 4.88 per 1000, so 0.02 under the average I quickly did. So that changes virtually nothing to the 25% average of extra beds.
Interesting and you've made a decent argument that the EU overall may have more available bed space, ( I'd need to know in more detail what and was'nt included, still too many questions) but doesn't change the original point that was addressing someone else. The US doesn't have a shortage of beds because private hospitals are evil and minimize all excess capacity, and the detailed data you averaged out supports that (look at some of the countries with fewer beds and higher utilization rates.
Actually it does. US hospital bed capacity (in both real and per 1000 terms) has been declining for decades:
in large part driven by hospital closures and mergers, as well as the implementation of HMO insurance plans which reduced hospital occupancy rates, all of which are driven by for-profit financial considerations:
"By the mid-1990s, Boston's hospitals were also becoming concerned about high HMO enrollment. In 1996, the HMOs' market share in Boston was 43.6 percent, compared with a national large metropolitan average of 27.8 percent. Boston's hospitals believed that the wide-scale use of global capitation was imminent and that selective contracting would steer more care away from the academic centers to traditional acute care hospitals in the community. The major hospital systems in Boston began to plan for hospital downsizing and service restructuring in their teaching and community hospitals. These plans included expanding certain core services at the teaching hospitals (e.g., cardiology, cardiac surgery, oncology, and orthopedics) and expanding traditional hospital services at system community hospitals (e.g., maternity care, elective orthopedic services, ophthalmology, psychiatric services, and postacute services).
Another event that strained Boston hospitals was cutbacks in Medicare payments that resulted from the 1997 Balanced Budget Act (BBA). Although the BBA affected hospitals nationwide, Boston with its five teaching hospitals was especially hard hit given their high cost of care. Subsequent refinements of the BBA relaxed its provisions, but through 2000, Boston's hospitals generally reported financial losses that they attributed to this legislation. The CareGroup hospital system was especially affected, with its flagship, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, incurring large financial losses. These losses stifled plans to restructure services at Beth Israel Deaconess, and CareGroup instead had to focus on cutting rather than converting hospital capacity.
Overall, the hospital downsizing during this period led to the elimination of many staffed beds at Boston's hospitals and health systems. By 2000, Partners HealthCare system had eliminated 200 to 250 staffed beds; CareGroup Healthcare System, 250 staffed beds; and Boston Medical Center, nearly 150. In total, these cuts represented a 15 percent reduction in these institutions' overall staffed bed stock."
"Throughout most of the 1990s, the perception of many Cleveland stakeholders was that the market had too much hospital capacity. Even though hospitals like the Cleveland Clinic Foundation Hospital attracted admissions from both around the United States and abroad, the marketwide hospital occupancy rate in the community was only 59.7 percent in 1996, compared with the large metropolitan average of 62.1 percent (table 1).
Beginning in 1999, some hospitals in the market closed. In that year, St. Luke's Medical Center shut its acute care hospital, and in March 2000, Mt. Sinai Medical Center–University Circle closed. Shortly afterward, the national hospital management company that closed Mt. Sinai Medical Center–University Circle announced plans to close two more Cleveland hospitals, but they remained open due to community outcry and the actions of two of the community's large hospital systems. In all, the two hospitals that closed had about 600 to 700 staffed beds, which was about 9 percent of the market's capacity.
The immediate effect of the closures was to shift hospital service demand to the remaining hospitals, especially those in downtown Cleveland that were located near the two closed hospitals. Hospital occupancy rates increased citywide from 58.7 percent in 1998 to 62.5 percent in 2001. The number of visits to the emergency departments of the remaining hospitals increased to absorb the 77,000 visits per year that the two closed hospitals had once provided. Hospital respondents reported that as a result, the frequency of ambulance diversions in 2001 rose by 400 percent over that in 1998."
"A major factor that affected Miami's hospital capacity in the mid-1990s was the dominance of HMOs in the market and their influence on the demand for hospital services. In 1996, the market share of Miami's HMOs was 52.9 percent, almost double the large metropolitan area average of 27.8 percent. Declines in inpatient admissions and lengths of stay as a result of HMO dominance eventually led hospitals to reduce the number of beds they staffed.
Then a series of events in the late 1990s made hospitals in the community realize that their capacity was being strained. First, the consumer backlash against HMOs was believed to have increased the demand for inpatient services as health plans relaxed utilization management controls and offered more open access. At the same time, some hospitals in the market were expanding their national and international marketing to attract patients in high-margin service lines. During this period too, the demand for charity care continued to grow, and problems in Florida's long-term care industry led to backups of patients in hospitals caused by the reduced availability of nursing home beds."
"In the early 1990s, the Phoenix market was perceived to have excess hospital capacity because the state lacked CON legislation to regulate hospital growth and expansion. As HMOs' market share grew, Phoenix's hospitals reacted to actual and anticipated reductions in the demand for their services by maintaining the same number of staffed beds even while the area's population continued to grow. As a result, the number of staffed hospital beds per 1,000 population in Phoenix was only 1.9 in 2001, compared with the large metropolitan average of 2.5.
As it did in other communities, the backlash against managed care in Phoenix led to greater demand for hospital services. Table 1 data indicate that increased hospital services use in Phoenix in fact exceeded its rate of population growth. Specifically, Phoenix's population grew by 25.2 percent from 1996 to 2003, whereas inpatient admissions grew by 43.2 percent and emergency visits by 54.9 percent.
Also keep in mind that for the most part the perception that ~35% of hospital beds are empty at any given time is in large part driven by an uneven distribution of capacity which results in more rural states having an excess of available beds, in turn driving down the average utilization rates even though hospitals in many states are operating at much higher utilization rates:
Generally it seems like the smaller states and high pop. states are in the neighborhood of ~70+% occupancy ( a quick look seems to indicate New York peaks at 78%), vs rural/flyover states like Idaho, Nebraska, Wyoming, etc. that are in the 50% range.
Another aspect that isn't really discussed often is that on a baseline level, the US has a higher rate of preventable hospitalizations than most the rest of the industrialized world, in large part driven by our largely unaffordable for-profit healthcare system disincentivizing large numbers of patients from seeking early and/or preventative treatment and winding up in a hospital bed when their health situation worsens to the point of treatment being unavoidable:
Meaning that a larger share of our hospital beds are being used to treat patients that would not have needed a hospital bed otherwise.
As for the Europe having its peak all at once, of course not. But the US military is deploying a lot of force to NY and LA because of their peaks. But you can see peaks are starting to occur in Florida, Pennsylvania , Louisiana and Michigan, can they deploy there as forcefully at the same time as they are doing now in NY and LA? Even the Pentagon has pointed out that there are limits (from Joint Staff Surgeon Brigadier General P. Friedrichs):
We only have 2 hospital ships, so no. Various other classes have various medical capabilites, but you're talking anywhere between 10 and 50 beds depending on the type of vessel/class, and those are mostly ships that are needed elsewhere for other operations. This isn't our total military healthcare capacity mind you, Army and Air Force have additional assets that they can deploy, but none of them can come close to touching the breadth and depth of what those two ships can offer. The supplemental deployable healthcare resources offered by the military won't be able to truly shore up the deficiencies in our healthcare system unless the pandemic turns out to be a good bit less severe than what we are now expecting. IIRC theres 14 national guard field hospitals and 8 active duty field hospitals, each unit has a max capacity of ~250 beds (?) for a grand total of ~5500 additional beds? Most of the guard hospitals are operated by civilian healthcare professionals, so they aren't really deployable as they are needed in civilian hospitals at the moment, so you're probably limited to the 8 active duty ones, total of 2,000 additional beds? Thats not even a 1% increase over our available civilian bed capacity - its helpful in a localized breakout, but not in a nationwide pandemic.
I've seen some discussion of the army corps of engineers establishing supplementary field hospitals that can be staffed by retired healthcare professionals, but that seems somewhat inadvisable given the risks posed to older people. Theoretically you would only send non-infected patients to those facilities, but how effectively can you screen out any and all potential patients that might be infected to safeguard against a breakout?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/04/05 02:34:53
CoALabaer wrote: Wargamers hate two things: the state of the game and change.
Yeah some lady just passed around a petition to stop them from being put up in the local town because of all the toxic waves they will pump through people's bodies. It's like a harmlessly funny microcosm of about half the citizens in this entire country and how they think about Covid-19.
"By this point I'm convinced 100% that every single race in the 40k universe have somehow tapped into the ork ability to just have their tech work because they think it should."
Sheesh, Alpharius mention Phase two.....might as well start a thread and how and what to get to prepare for that.....remember the TWD dead thread we had so long ago
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
tneva82 wrote: Lol. In england there's sabotage against g5 masts due to theories g5 network masts spread corona virus.
Wtf? Under what logic that works??? People getting bored enough to invent conspiracy theories?
edit: aah linked above. Funny as hell. And unsurprisingly ignores the fact it spreads even where no G5 exists.
We know for a fact that a lot of the antivax movement was spearheaded/spread/sponsored by Russia (in addition to sponsoring soe European and Other political parties and movements), I do have to wonder if this latest bout of idiocy isn't just more of their truly superb online psychological warfare.
Started out with discredited Quack Andrew Wakefield, who published a single ropey study claiming a single vaccine (combined MMR) has a link to Autism.
British Gutter Press of course ran with it. I distinctly remember god awful comments about why wouldn’t Gordon Brown confirm his sons has been vaccinated etc, stirring up a right hornets nest of stupidity.
So in the U.K. at least, at it all spiralled from there.
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
tneva82 wrote: Lol. In england there's sabotage against g5 masts due to theories g5 network masts spread corona virus.
Wtf? Under what logic that works??? People getting bored enough to invent conspiracy theories?
edit: aah linked above. Funny as hell. And unsurprisingly ignores the fact it spreads even where no G5 exists.
We know for a fact that a lot of the antivax movement was spearheaded/spread/sponsored by Russia (in addition to sponsoring soe European and Other political parties and movements), I do have to wonder if this latest bout of idiocy isn't just more of their truly superb online psychological warfare.
Time to regionlock Russia Fething highpingers them all !
/Joke.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
Started out with discredited Quack Andrew Wakefield, who published a single ropey study claiming a single vaccine (combined MMR) has a link to Autism.
British Gutter Press of course ran with it. I distinctly remember god awful comments about why wouldn’t Gordon Brown confirm his sons has been vaccinated etc, stirring up a right hornets nest of stupidity.
So in the U.K. at least, at it all spiralled from there.
Indeed, but he was also struck off here and now pedals his clown show in the US, where people seem to eat it up.
It will be interesting to see if this has any sort of ecmffect on the anti vax movements, as they were gaining traction in some areas.
Started out with discredited Quack Andrew Wakefield, who published a single ropey study claiming a single vaccine (combined MMR) has a link to Autism.
British Gutter Press of course ran with it. I distinctly remember god awful comments about why wouldn’t Gordon Brown confirm his sons has been vaccinated etc, stirring up a right hornets nest of stupidity.
So in the U.K. at least, at it all spiralled from there.
I'd also note that Gordon Brown's refusal to admit seemed to carry far more weight than the scientific study when it came to that whole mess. There was also a lot of noise about how it was only the combined drug and why couldn't individual versions be given out etc...
1750 pts Blood Specters
6000 pts Disciples of Fate
3500 pts Peridia Prime
2500 pts Prophets of Fate
Lizardmen 3000 points Tlaxcoatl Temple-City
Heresy World Eaters/Emperors Children 