12-04-2020, 08:17 PM
Oh wow, sounds like we have budding conspiracy theories here.
I wish the subject were "Most of SF Bay Area adopts Stay at Home order". I read "triggers" as though our ICU availability plummeted in the last day.
Regarding San Mateo: The state and county data sources are dramatically inconsistent.
We've recently been viewing only staffed (ie, non-surge) beds in statistics. The 15% threshold doesn't specify staffed or surge or whatever. The link to a particular source at the CDPH is broken.
The state's database indicates San Mateo Co. has 38 ICU beds available, but does not indicate the total number of beds. The number available has ranged from 27 to 43 over the last few weeks.
The San Mateo County dashboard indicates only 8 staffed & available ICU beds available (less than 15% of the total of 67 they show). They've not shown more than 15 available ICU beds in the 2 weeks of data they have there.
Can anyone explain this inconsistency of data?
I wish the subject were "Most of SF Bay Area adopts Stay at Home order". I read "triggers" as though our ICU availability plummeted in the last day.
Regarding San Mateo: The state and county data sources are dramatically inconsistent.
We've recently been viewing only staffed (ie, non-surge) beds in statistics. The 15% threshold doesn't specify staffed or surge or whatever. The link to a particular source at the CDPH is broken.
The state's database indicates San Mateo Co. has 38 ICU beds available, but does not indicate the total number of beds. The number available has ranged from 27 to 43 over the last few weeks.
The San Mateo County dashboard indicates only 8 staffed & available ICU beds available (less than 15% of the total of 67 they show). They've not shown more than 15 available ICU beds in the 2 weeks of data they have there.
Can anyone explain this inconsistency of data?