>The list is endless of what we didn't have in 1918, from computers to do DNA sequencing to even testing the way we do today.
And the vast majority is useless to people when you've got 100x more patients than you can deal with.
And the vast majority is useless to people when you've got 100x more patients than you can deal with.
Not many countries (any?) have the capability to build things as fast as China does.
And even if a country has them, China is the source of so many supplies that they will simply keep them for themselves.
Let this be a lesson to avoid dependencies on a single entity.
Not true, China has sent, and are continuing to do so, aid to, amongst others, Italy and Spain [1], including 100k respirators [2].
[1]: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-spain-...
[2]: https://www.corriere.it/politica/20_marzo_10/coronavirus-mil...
I also think many countries could do something similar (ignoring technical progress) in 1918, given they had had ample practice in world war 1.
While its a great feat--and China is prob the only country that can do it--that's nothing if we get hundreds of millions infected with a virulent version. 30 ICU units might serve a town with 35000 people
You're essentially making the claim that having electricity is worthless, if there isn't enough for everyone to run a heater. Apples and oranges.
It's about intelligent use of strategic resources, not the fact that those resources exist at all.
It's not obvious that we're better at intelligent use of strategic resources than we were a century ago.
Our economic systems promote brutal winner-takes-all internal competition, not strategic cooperation, and that makes them ridiculously brittle when they have to deal with an unexpected stressor.