Quote:
Originally Posted by SMD
We don't know the scale of the problem because testing hasn't really started in any meaningful way. In NYC, the doctors I know are all working around the clock. And we have barely any "confirmed" cases, although they are increasing rapidly now that testing is becoming more common, though still infrequent. Also, the point is not every single bed is occupied with C19 cases, but the relevant statistic is how much excess capacity does the system have to handle these cases above and beyond the normal base case workload? My guess is most hospitals that are well run do not have a lot of spare beds or spare personnel lying around as they it is not a cost effective way to run any operation. So how much incremental capacity is there in the system compared to what the system would face with moderate outbreak? How quickly can we scale up that capacity? How can we delay the onset so that we can scale up? Lots of unknowns, and I understand the skepticism, but we need to prepare for the worst and hope for the best.
|
I think you are correct and most operate as for profit business, so they follow the similar faulty ideal of the just in time inventory delivery method that corporations in other industries do in order to increase "turnover" and supposed "profitability". I imagine all this will put pressure on many countries and industries to develop backup capacity and/or inventory and place a premium on quality of product/services rather than just in time service/product. There's certainly the argument that running lean actually deteriorates shareholder value in long-term stability in favor of short-term earnings. In other words keep pushing the ball down the course and "risk management" says look to scenario analysis and incorrectly focus on most entirely the highest probability outcome only. Using a single-factor model/solution to a multi-factor problem is really the problem and imo the biggest shareholder detriment.