[teejers1]

Another sign that things are reaching a breaking point:

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archi...ed/617301/

The ratio of new hospitalizations to new diagnoses is going down.  That would be a good thing if the diagnoses are being made earlier or of patients with milder symptoms (because of increased testing), but as the article makes plain, that's not what is going on (as one can tell by observing that the case fatality rate is actually going up).  What is happening is that people who might have previously been admitted to the hospital are being turned away (or are deciding not to go to the hospital).

But ominous no longer fits what we’re observing in the data, because calamity is no longer imminent; it is here. The bulk of evidence now suggests that one of the worst fears of the pandemic—that hospitals would become overwhelmed, leading to needless deaths—is happening now. Americans are dying of COVID-19 who, had they gotten sick a month earlier, would have lived. This is such a searingly ugly idea that it is worth repeating: Americans are likely dying of COVID-19 now who would have survived had they gotten September’s level of medical care.

BC

I understand the urge to paint as bleak a picture as possible - and it is correct that regulators are clamping down.  

But it is worth noting that the article you highlight uses words like "suggests," and "likely."  Also, your point assumes that the only reason people are deciding not to go to the hospital is because  . . . what?  There are too many cases there?  In other words, what makes you think that hypothetical set of people would have gone to the hospital in September?

I'm most focused on SCC.  The situation is certainly deteriorating - it's also true than non-Covid patients (1700) outpace Covid patients (325) by substantial amount.  I suspect there can be some interim relief there with non-emergency admits.  Separately, the bed numbers were re-set (as were ventilators) to remove surge beds or make number more aligned with staffing availability (IIUTC - but defer to MT on that).  I'm good with that as capacity numbers should be realistic, but it's also possible there is upside there.

We may end up in the calamity/Hospital Armageddon many here have . . . predicted.  Hopefully people will behave more responsibly and bring the numbers down and that can be avoided.

As an aside, given what I see in day-to-day life in Palo Alto (i.e., universal mask compliance; not a lot of group socializing outside - and if so, pretty responsible at parks), I really wonder what's driving these numbers.  One thing that remains alarming:  LTCF.  In last half of November, 75 cases (and the first half of November was much worse - 145).  Wonder how many of those folks end up in SCC hospitals?  [And we just got notice that at my mom's facility a staffer tested positive, so the whole place is set for a couple rounds of testing there].

[teejers1]

Another sign that things are reaching a breaking point:

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archi...ed/617301/

The ratio of new hospitalizations to new diagnoses is going down.  That would be a good thing if the diagnoses are being made earlier or of patients with milder symptoms (because of increased testing), but as the article makes plain, that's not what is going on (as one can tell by observing that the case fatality rate is actually going up).  What is happening is that people who might have previously been admitted to the hospital are being turned away (or are deciding not to go to the hospital).

But ominous no longer fits what we’re observing in the data, because calamity is no longer imminent; it is here. The bulk of evidence now suggests that one of the worst fears of the pandemic—that hospitals would become overwhelmed, leading to needless deaths—is happening now. Americans are dying of COVID-19 who, had they gotten sick a month earlier, would have lived. This is such a searingly ugly idea that it is worth repeating: Americans are likely dying of COVID-19 now who would have survived had they gotten September’s level of medical care.

BC

I understand the urge to paint as bleak a picture as possible - and it is correct that regulators are clamping down.  

But it is worth noting that the article you highlight uses words like "suggests," and "likely."  Also, your point assumes that the only reason people are deciding not to go to the hospital is because  . . . what?  There are too many cases there?  In other words, what makes you think that hypothetical set of people would have gone to the hospital in September?

I'm most focused on SCC.  The situation is certainly deteriorating - it's also true than non-Covid patients (1700) outpace Covid patients (325) by substantial amount.  I suspect there can be some interim relief there with non-emergency admits.  Separately, the bed numbers were re-set (as were ventilators) to remove surge beds or make number more aligned with staffing availability (IIUTC - but defer to MT on that).  I'm good with that as capacity numbers should be realistic, but it's also possible there is upside there.

We may end up in the calamity/Hospital Armageddon many here have . . . predicted.  Hopefully people will behave more responsibly and bring the numbers down and that can be avoided.

As an aside, given what I see in day-to-day life in Palo Alto (i.e., universal mask compliance; not a lot of group socializing outside - and if so, pretty responsible at parks), I really wonder what's driving these numbers.  One thing that remains alarming:  LTCF.  In last half of November, 75 cases (and the first half of November was much worse - 145).  Wonder how many of those folks end up in SCC hospitals?  [And we just got notice that at my mom's facility a staffer tested positive, so the whole place is set for a couple rounds of testing there].