Ventilators

Now that COVIS-19 "testing" is coming on line in a big way, the Democrats and their trained hamsters in the media need to pivot to the next topic that will increase fear, uncertainly and doubt (FUD) among members of the general public. After all, it's very important for the media (and their Dem masters) to keep the hysteria dial maxed out. No context, under any circumstances! Use language such as "cases skyrocketed!!!!" rather than a more measured, "As expected, there was an increase in cases as the progression of the virus continues."

One of the topics recently chosen to spike FUD is the availability of "ventilators"—medical devices that are necessary in the rare cases when COVID-19 progresses into a full-blown pulminary threat (particularly among the old who have been admitted to an ICU).

The Dems keep telling us they're "science-based" and that the Trump administration is not. There is no basis whatsoever for that allegation, but it's yet another catalyst for FUD. There are, of course, real scientists who take these issues seriously and have for some time. In a 2015 scientific paper by Martin Meltzer et al, the researchers examined the availability of ventilators and their impact during a pulminary event. The study is complex, and I encourage those so inclined to read the whole thing. The authors derive mathematical relationships to predict ventilator requirements in best and worst case environments. They conclude:

Our results demonstrate that the next influenza pandemic will likely produce a surge in patients, admitted to hospitals under current standards of medical care, who will require mechanical ventilation. It must be acknowledged that in pandemics caused by influenza strains that cause large numbers of critically ill patients, there may not be the ability to meet peak demand for ventilation. Thus, public health officials, hospital administrators, and practicing physicians need to develop plans now as to how to allocate scarce ventilators [20]. If ventilator capacity becomes scarce, then each hospital or group of hospitals need to consider how they will practically and ethically prioritize patients be placed on a ventilator. Powell et al [21] describe a triage system developed for use in New York state hospitals that included the following components: “duty to care, duty to steward resources, duty to plan, distributive justice, and transparency.” The authors considered their triage system to be a “… radical shift from ordinary standards of care.”

This paper was written in 2015, during the previous Democratic administration. If we were to use the (admittedly idiotic) criteria currently being applied by the Dems and their trained hamsters in the media, we would breathlessly ask:

-- Why did President Obama not act on this 'science-based' analysis?
-- Did his administration not care about people afflicted with a flu virus?
-- Did he and his advisors reject science?
-- Is he to blame for a lack of ventilators now.
-- Is he, therefore, culpable for COVID-19 deaths among the elderly?

Of course, all of these questions are grossly unfair and ridiculous -- Just like the ventilator questions that are being asked right now by Obama's own party and their media flunkies.