Morons at it again

[TrappedinCalifornia]

Why do you always persist in rebutting the argument you want, instead of what is actually said? Why write all this when the original argument has nothing to do with what you expound upon, vociferously and lugubriously?

None of the things you mentioned are convalescent facilities. Not the hospital ship (which is a poor substitute for an actual hospital anyway), and certainly not garage facilities converted into covid19 wings.

Could those same facilities have been designated as convalescent facilities? sure. but that wasn't what their mission was, and no one changed their mission to take on that task.

and right now, there isn't even those facilities. so once again, where would you have them go?

How about your place? I mean, you're the one lecturing that everyone should sacrifice and you are continuously posting about how you think things SHOULD be.

So... How about we let you lead by example?

You asserted...

...There's no dedicated post-acute COVID19 care facility that I know of...

Now you acknowledge the facilities I noted COULD have been designated such. I suppose the fact that I also noted that the one in Reno appears to be in use for just that purpose (where I included an interview with a patient housed in that facility who is noted as 'recuperating') had nothing to do with that admission.

Insofar as "rebutting the argument I want, instead of what is actually said..." Project much do you?

That's almost ALL you do and have done. You parse what you want, then set that against what you claim things SHOULD be (in your opinion) and excoriate those who have not made it so. As you have been repeatedly told by myself and others, the world simply does not work that way.

You have, incessantly, declared this a 'war' by likening the 'necessary sacrifices' to WWII; including stopping all American production to turn out nothing but PPE. Well... You go to 'war' with what you got.

As I said, you want sufficient "quarantine/convalescent facilities" in every location, capable of meeting every 'surge,' and specifically designated as such, with no 'other' role... realizing that the facilities and staff for those facilities, will largely sit idle between 'surges.' The evidence being that the facilities I noted (and you disparage as not having been designated "convalescent/recovery" from the beginning) were either only partially utilized or not utilized at all... period. But, you turn around and complain about how much money has been spent.

Of course, that's without noting the problems (and costs) intrinsic to moving critical/contagious patients to a different facility to 'convalesce.' (Which was part of the reason that U.S.N.S. Comfort only dealt with a very few patients; e.g., they had to be evaluated, including tested for the virus, before being allowed to be taken to the ship, where the ship's primary mission was to deal with non-COVID infected individuals so that the city's hospitals could deal with [be designated for] active COVID cases.) Even if it is simply to a different floor in an existing facility, if we go with the prevailing assumption that they are still 'contagious' or potentially so, such a transfer can involve more than simply PPE for staff. If they are no longer contagious and no longer acute, what is the problem with what they have been doing; i.e., placing them in an overflow facility specifically designated for COVID patients or sending them home as hospitals do with many patients suffering from or having suffered from numerous ailments every day?

Because YOU want more facilities that will sit idle the majority of the time? Never mind the cost?!?! Part of that cost would include what YOU perceive as a "great time" to be a nurse due to the pay you feel is "incredible;" nurses who, assigned to such a facility, will sit idle at their designated assignment at their designated facility until patients who are designated as 'convalescent' are assigned and transferred to that facility? (Bearing in mind that 'incredible pay' isn't as 'incredible' as it seems to you, as actual nurses and others pointed out on that thread.) It will add up and potentially divert resources (human, material, space, and funding) from tending those who are actually contagious and acute.

Then there's the fact, as has been pointed out on numerous threads, that hospitals are NOT tending to the 'normal emergencies' such as stroke, heart attack, etc. due to...

Mournful dark, dramatic and 'lugubrious?' I think I asked this before, but... Project much do you?

I don't think I need to explain that and if I do... Well... Let's just say that I'm not the one continuously posting in this section (and OT) that if we don't shut everything down and follow the (often mixed/conflicting) "medical dictum" (ahem), hundreds of thousands, maybe millions, are gonna... And... Anyone who disagrees is incapable of comprehension, unqualified, an idiot, a liar, et al. Then claiming that anything which contradicts your worldview is akin to a personal affront and a 'crime against humanity.'

As I told you some time ago, there are many things you post which are good information. Unfortunately, you keep drowning that out by tagging your personal agenda to many/most of the posts/threads; sometimes openly, often in a passive/aggressive manner. It's not that you are... entirely... wrong. But, in many ways, you keep communicating despondency and frustration that we don't have the utopia-like solution you feel we should; denying that you support the 'despotic' type of System that might make what you want happen. Bear in mind that I'm not the only one telling you that; despite your continued efforts to make it a 'personal' issue.

[duenor]

How about your place? I mean, you're the one lecturing that everyone should sacrifice and you are continuously posting about how you think things SHOULD be.

Yet another long winded post that goes in circles, shuffling goalposts around, adding nothing to the original discussion.

Find a post where I advocate for shutting everything down, let alone "if we don't shut everything down and follow the (often mixed/conflicting) "medical dictum" (ahem), hundreds of thousands, maybe millions, are gonna.." You won't find one.

You could've chosen to have a discussion about what could be done at this point to create those convalescent spaces. You could've chosen to put your time, effort, and vocabulary into putting forth some ideas that might be worth considering, maybe even worth bringing up to the attention of local government. Instead, you appear interested only in arguing for the sake of arguing, even when the fundamental position from which you base those arguments is both factually incorrect and rhetorically untenable.

At the present, there is no place to put recovering covid19 patients that are no longer in need of acute care aside from returning them to SNF/LTC, or sending them home. You're welcome to offer ideas around that, or point out where there are indeed places to put these patients.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

Yet another long winded post that goes in circles, shuffling goalposts around, adding nothing to the original discussion.

Find a post where I advocate for shutting everything down, let alone "if we don't shut everything down and follow the (often mixed/conflicting) "medical dictum" (ahem), hundreds of thousands, maybe millions, are gonna.." You won't find one.

We've had this discussion, several times. Not going to do it... again.

You could've chosen to have a discussion about what could be done at this point to create those convalescent spaces. You could've chosen to put your time, effort, and vocabulary into putting forth some ideas that might be worth considering, maybe even worth bringing up to the attention of local government. Instead, you appear interested only in arguing for the sake of arguing, even when the fundamental position from which you base those arguments is both factually incorrect and rhetorically untenable.

So... Rather than talking about how you keep pushing an agenda, you want to criticize me for not taking up your agenda. Talk about going in circles.

Uh... I'll assume you read the part about how spaces that were created earlier this year and went largely or wholly unutilized, are now being used as 'convalescent spaces?' Oh, yeah. You did...

...Could those same facilities have been designated as convalescent facilities? sure. but that wasn't what their mission was, and no one changed their mission to take on that task.

and right now, there isn't even those facilities...

Uh... Comfort, Javits Center Open Care to COVID-19 Patients

Governor Cuomo Announces Federal Government has Granted His Request to Allow COVID-19 Patients to be Treated at USNS Comfort

Coronavirus News: Javits Center hospital closing after treating more than 1,000 amid COVID-19 pandemic

I could talk about the 'field hospital' which was set up in this area for something like 6 weeks and wasn't utilized; thus, they took it down. I already pointed out the thread about the one in Reno. This thread is based on what they are doing in one location in Massachusetts.

It would seem that there ARE and WERE such facilities available and I'm not going to go through and provide you a 'map' of every location that was and, in many case, still are available for such use. Why? Because...

...None of the things you mentioned are convalescent facilities. Not the hospital ship (which is a poor substitute for an actual hospital anyway), and certainly not garage facilities converted into covid19 wings...

In other words, you refuse to accept anything other than a new facility specifically dedicated to what you want it to be as an alternative. As you've already been told, there are numerous reasons why that didn't happen and is unlikely any time soon, if at all. Thus, the only reason 'my argument' is 'fundamentally incorrect' is that you won't accept "what is" and want to talk about what you deem should be.

Talk about arguing for the sake of arguing.

At the present, there is no place to put recovering covid19 patients that are no longer in need of acute care aside from returning them to SNF/LTC, or sending them home. You're welcome to offer ideas around that, or point out where there are indeed places to put these patients.

No place? Despite the fact that you've been shown there are places, some of which have been around for months, which are now being newly used or reused, specifically for that purpose? Then you tell me what I'm "welcome" to post on this thread; despite my having already noted several locations you refuse to deem 'acceptable.'

Once again, an argument is not factually incorrect or rhetorically untenable simply because you won't accept the facts as they exist.

That's without even acknowledging the questions I posed to you regarding the costs of what you wish to deem 'acceptable;' a recurring theme with you. (See our discussions regarding turning U.S. production over to PPE. See your discussions with others regarding the costs to the economy regarding some of your other assertions.) As I indicated, those costs include the potential diversion of resources from those who are acute; resources you already decry as 'insufficient.'

It's just like my asking you...

If they are no longer contagious and no longer acute, what is the problem with what they have been doing; i.e., placing them in an overflow facility specifically designated for COVID patients or sending them home as hospitals do with many patients suffering from or having suffered from numerous ailments every day?

Your only response is that there's no place to put them except... SNF/LTC, or sending them home?

Do we have newly constructed, 'convalescent facilities' specifically designated for every variant of contagious disease (including, but not limited to, the mumps, chicken pox, norovirus, the flu, meningitis, whooping cough, STI's, MRSA), some/all of which can create fatalities/serious complications/long-term debilitation, every time there is an 'outbreak?'

Or... Do we transfer them to a 'recovery area' or send them 'home' once they are no longer acute/contagious?

Why would we do that? To keep resources available for 'normal' health issues which hospitals/doctors deal with regularly? Because those patients who are no longer acute/contagious don't necessarily need 'immediate' access to the same resources required by those who are acute/contagious?

There's only so much money and material, not to mention people to go around. Priorities are established for how those resources are designated and for what purpose. There is no ideal or utopia solution and never is; only an historical evaluation of what was 'successful' and what wasn't.

It's like the ammunition shortage. The manufacturers argue that they can't invest in expansion or obtain additional raw materials to meet a 'temporary' spike in demand. While we may quibble with some of that, the reality is there is 'truth' in their claim.

The same thing here. Outbreaks of communicable diseases are, by definition and nature, temporary. But, you wish to...

...For pandemic pricing, it's actually quite a good price. I haven't followed this story much, though.

We could ask why we have to keep buying what is basically a national security strategic asset from China, but no point since clearly this administration does not see domestic PPE production as a high priority.

You know what? I follow milsurp stuff pretty closely as a long time 07. Interordance just imported a few thousand M1 Carbines from Ethiopia. Price is 999-1600, with the $1600 ones being "like new". Now how did they get there? During WWII M1 Carbines were a mobilized product. A whole bunch of companies that never made guns were given contracts by the War Dept. to make M1Cs. IBM, Rock-Ola (jukeboxes), Postal Meter, Irwin-Pederson (tools), etc. The effort was a massive success, with more than 5 million M1Cs cranked out. They made so many and so quickly that after the war all the contracts had to be cancelled and sadly many employees were laid off (a history lesson not lost on Mike Bowen, CEO of Prestige Ameritech, the biggest PPE maker in the US). And then we had so many of those things that we gave them away as cold war gifts all over the world.

It's entirely possible for us to crank these things out in massive amounts. But I don't think that's going to happen.

Despite the fact that, back in April, it was announced... President Donald J. Trump Has Led A Historic Mobilization To Combat The Coronavirus

While we can argue over specifics and specific regions, the reality is that even Cuomo and Newsom, two of Trump's harshest critics and most active 'resistors,' have acknowledged the results of those efforts during the height of the initial surge.

...He cited, as he has before, the sending of the Navy ship USNS Comfort and the construction of a military field hospital at the Javits Center as examples of the president responding quickly to the state's needs...

...Newsom says he also asked the president to let California use federal government mobile field hospitals and a Navy medical ship to handle a surge in patients.

The two mobile hospitals can each accommodate nearly 500 patients, while the Navy medical ship can hold 1,000, he said.

Trump said that he and Newsom have also discussed the potential deployment of units from the Army Corps of Engineers to California to help the state retrofit facilities as temporary hospitals...

Yet, as has been amply pointed out, such facilities were largely underutilized, if they were even used at all. In fact, many of those resources still exist and are being reactivated/used AS NEEDED in specific locations; being set aside, specifically, for either active cases or recovery.

Now... You are, once again, criticizing the lack of effort and/or appropriate mindset because temporary facilities were created and are, as necessary, being reactivated and insisting that only permanently(?) designated facilities, with complete resources (unnecessary for the no longer acute/contagious) have not been created?

Talk about going in circles and creating new, not just 'shuffling,' goalposts.

As I asked... Project much do you?

The bottom line is that you and I, not to mention you and others, have gone 'round the barn numerous times over the idea that you have a specific point of view and we have our's. You primarily parse what you want from things (including your sources and the arguments/replies of others), then create a straw man to argue against, then turn any disagreement into a personal affront and a crime or potential crime 'against humanity.'

As has been discussed, you are not entirely wrong and many of the informational things you post are good/relevant. But, you insist on pushing your agenda and demand we all contribute based on your point of view. When we don't, you throw accusations of idiocy, ignorance, lack of and inability for comprehension/understanding, liar, misinformation, et al. When we still don't play by your rules, you then 'challenge' us to show where you said that; much like when Biden said he never used the phrase "defund the police" while using the very definition of "defund the police" instead. You deny any need to proffer your qualifications for such extensive opining on this topic beyond friends/family who work in the medical field; but, turn around and demand that others put forth their qualifications to offer opinions you disagree with.

Unfortunately, it takes time and, often, extensive posts to unwind much of that type of input. You'll note that I have done so... selectively... in that I'm not on virtually every thread in this section challenging your assertions. I do, however, occasionally 'challenge' your posits when they are or appear to be clearly wrong or misleading. Thus far, you have yet to prove me incorrect in those assessments. At best, all you've done is establish what we already know... You have your opinion.