Look at These Covid-19 Hospitalizations - Hospitals Swamped by Small Numbers is Not Good.

Thursday, July 16, 2020

The National News states that Texas, Arizona, Florida, and California hospitals are reaching maximum capacity, due to so many Covid-19 patients.

But when you look at: www.cdc.gov... you see:

TEXAS - Covid-19 patients are just 16.8% of the inpatient population.
ARIZONA = 25.2%
FLORIDA = 16.7%
CALIFORNIA = 11%


Those percentages equate to the following numbers, according to: covidtracking.com...

TEXAS = 10,457 Covid-19 inpatients (Population = 29 million)
ARIZONA = 3,454 Covid-19 inpatients (Pop = 7.3 million)
FLORIDA = 9,112 Covid-19 inpatients (Pop = 21.5 million)
CALIFORNIA = 8,363 Covid-19 inpatients (Pop = 39.5 million)

If hospitals in those 4 states are reaching capacity due to a small number of Covid-19 patients, relative to the state's population, doesn't that imply the hospitals do NOT have enough capacity?

That a legitimate significant medical crisis would totally swamp those states, and many others?

-CareWeMust

I can't find the article, but orlando health director said that capacity had been scaled down, and that they could go from 200 to 500 ICU beds very quickly should the need arise.

Also, in the 2017-2018 flu season there were 800,000 hospitalizations...we are at about 250,000 with covid.

www.cdc.gov...

Found that link

www.clickorlando.com... reases/

Surely though, as it is a virus, not all hospitals are being swamped. if in fact any are.

Some hospitals may be being swamped where there are large numbers of cases. t's non sensical to look at the populatin of a state when you are talking abouy something that will spike in certain areas.

Had a look and did'nt find any articles saying all hospitals are at capacity.

a reply to: carewemust

July 16: Tracking Florida COVID-19 Cases, Hospitalizations, and Fatalities





We were warned that this could overload the system.

Capacity = available space. Not maximum potential space. Remember....many hospitals scaled back when this #show started. They stopped elective procedures, many of which require overnight stays, and closed floors, wards and departments. They laid off staff as well.

a reply to: carewemust

You are correct. They have jack for capacity.

Similar to "just in time" supply chains, hospitals only have enough beds and employees to meet the expected needs. Anything additional is considered "waste" under the principle of lean and is eliminated to increase profit.

I wonder what happened to the regular flu...
It just magically disappeared.

originally posted by: BadBoYeed
I can't find the article, but orlando health director said that capacity had been scaled down, and that they could go from 200 to 500 ICU beds very quickly should the need arise.

Also, in the 2017-2018 flu season there were 800,000 hospitalizations...we are at about 250,000 with covid.

www.cdc.gov...

Found that link

www.clickorlando.com... reases/

I get a "404 page not found" error for your clickorlando.com link.

But I read that ICU hospital beds cost $30,000 each, which is probably why hospitals don't generally have that many of them.

There have probably been a couple hundred thousand Covid-19 hospitalizations in the U.S. since the beginning of the year.

originally posted by: Tim2win
Surely though, as it is a virus, not all hospitals are being swamped. if in fact any are.

Some hospitals may be being swamped where there are large numbers of cases. t's non sensical to look at the populatin of a state when you are talking abouy something that will spike in certain areas.

Had a look and did'nt find any articles saying all hospitals are at capacity.

The average person hears every day this month, "Florida hospitals are nearing capacity", or "Arizona hospitals are at capacity". The News generalizes.

a reply to: Grimpachi
The "system" capacity is too small if fewer than 10,000 patients suffering one disease can swamp a state.

originally posted by: TXRabbit
Capacity = available space. Not maximum potential space. Remember....many hospitals scaled back when this #show started. They stopped elective procedures, many of which require overnight stays, and closed floors, wards and departments. They laid off staff as well.

OK...If they downsized, they can upsize. Right?

They made a stupid decision around here over the years, downsize the hospitals to save money. They examined how many beds were going unused, most of the surgeries are outpatient surgeries now, or just one day in the hospital so they figured they could reduce the hospital room count to a third of what they had before.

That has happened all over the country, replace rooms and ICU rooms since they were not needed. The old hospitals here could have held five times as much patients as they do now in this area. Hospitals want technology, and that technology is very expensive and also very profitable because they can do one MRI and ER visit and make more than they get for five days in the hospital...in four hours.

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: carewemust

You are correct. They have jack for capacity.

Similar to "just in time" supply chains, hospitals only have enough beds and employees to meet the expected needs. Anything additional is considered "waste" under the principle of lean and is eliminated to increase profit.

So if we have government-run healthcare, the profit-motive is removed, and hundreds of new hospitals will be built and maintained, courtesy of Uncle Sam.

originally posted by: Bluntone22
I wonder what happened to the regular flu...
It just magically disappeared.

The U.S. Government quits tracking Flu cases in May, according to the CDC website. They only keep Flu stats from October thru May...what they refer to as "The Flu Season".

a reply to: rickymouse
Maybe the best solution for "hotspots" is to have more of the huge "Tent Hospitals" and Navy ships, like MERCY and COMFORT.

These hospitals can be rapidly deployed to states that need them.

Wouldn't do much good if there's a major military strike, or an Asteroid hit on the U.S., though.

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: carewemust

You are correct. They have jack for capacity.

Similar to "just in time" supply chains, hospitals only have enough beds and employees to meet the expected needs. Anything additional is considered "waste" under the principle of lean and is eliminated to increase profit.

So if we have government-run healthcare, the profit-motive is removed, and hundreds of new hospitals will be built and maintained, courtesy of Uncle Sam.

Something like that, taxpayer funded, same as police, schools, military..etc, etc.

a reply to: carewemust

If I see one more f'in graph i swear to god...

Just stop, STOP! The hospitals weren't overwhelmed in March, April, May, June or right now. I went past two everyday the past 4 months nothing, nada, zilch, zero. A state that was predicted to have 50,000 DEAD, not infected, dead. Even with every single death counted as covid it's not even 2,000. Maybe they meant over the next 20 years?

This will not be propped up by treasonous media much longer.

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: carewemust

You are correct. They have jack for capacity.

Similar to "just in time" supply chains, hospitals only have enough beds and employees to meet the expected needs. Anything additional is considered "waste" under the principle of lean and is eliminated to increase profit.

So if we have government-run healthcare, the profit-motive is removed, and hundreds of new hospitals will be built and maintained, courtesy of Uncle Sam.

The US military has no profit-motive. It could be reasonably argued that if you're not worried about profit there is no reason to cut costs.

originally posted by: vonclod
Something like that, taxpayer funded, same as police, schools, military..etc, etc.

Well the interesting part is everything you mention above also has a private sector that does the same, and that is the key. We can all agree that when the Government runs something it isn't as good as what the private sector offers and cost much more overall. Where Obamacare failed was it wanted to force all Americans into the program and force young low income healthy people to pay a good amount for it all, and it did all this while keeping the hyperinflated medical costs in place with insurance companies still in charged.

Not a good combination to try and fix the 20 million that really need the help.

a reply to: carewemust

I am not opposed to wearing masks, I think it is a sensible thing to try to dampen the spread of this disease.

But also, the people who are getting it now and getting natural antibodies might be better off than if they got it along with the flu or pneumonia in the winter....except of course, the people with compromised immune systems or those on meds that suppress their immune system from operating correctly. This virus does not go well with people who are on anti-rejection meds for organ transplants. Also those people who are on cancer meds are at a higher risk and some meds for high cholesterol or certain meds that treat depression or anxiety. also some high blood pressure pills can increase susceptibility to more severe cases. We are an over-medicated society in America.