Hacker News Reader

I think you are making an important point here that I would love somebody to answer. Why is covid different than riding a motorcycle? Nobody is required to ride a motorcycle. We know for a fact, it's more dangerous than driving a car as a mode of transport. It's a person needlessly putting themselves in danger purely for their own reasons. Why is there no talk of denying a hospital bed to them? The same applies to obesity and a 1000 other things.

Why is covid different than riding a motorcycle?

Would you agree with this analogy:

"Going out into crowded public spaces unmasked and unvaccinated ... is not unlike riding a motorcycle without a helmet. And with a busted taillight and bad brakes too, because you're also putting other people at risk."

The mask is like having disc brakes. No mask is like having drum breaks. Walking up to someone and coughing in their face is no brakes. You may be more likely to save a life with the disc brakes, but I admit I occasionally ride bikes with drum brakes instead.

Being vaccinated is a strong tail light (having already had COVID before may be a strong tail light too). Being unvaccinated but never caught COVID is a legal but moderate tail light. Being deathly ill but sneezing on the produce is no tail light.

Wonderful, so I take it you are advocating that anybody who drives a motorcycle with no tail light and drum brakes should be left to die outside the hospital if something happens? Would that be an accurate assessment of your position?

Not at all.

I would not agree with that analogy regarding masks. Nor, I suspect, would noted expert on infectious diseases Dr. Monica Gandhi. I recommend you listen to her recent statements on the subject.

https://peterattiamd.com/covid-part2/

https://profiles.ucsf.edu/monica.gandhi

I'm not sure what you're driving at, because she clearly doesn't think that "masks" as such are ineffective - just the cloth/surgical masks -- she advocates N95/KN95. Which of course are what everyone should be wearing now (in close public settings), by this point.

Also, the discussion in that podcast is a bit strange (for a bunch of reasons). For one thing, it seems to reduce the "mask question" to one of individual (or close family) risk -- "If I'm comfortable with the risk level (as affects me and my family), I should be able to decide whether to wear a mask or not (paraphrasing)" -- and completely sidesteps the community risk issue (especially in crowded public settings). Which is very different, and is of course what mask mandates (whether you agree with them or not) are designed to address.

For another, it dwells a lot on the "shame" and (what they think of) as quasi-religious aspects of mask wearing - this idea that people expect others to wear masks because those who do not are "unclean". Which may be what some people think, but to suggest that this is what most people think or that this should be part of the policy debate is just ... werid.

You're seriously complaining that when someone seeks healthcare they are using a bed?

No, not when they "seek healthcare". But when they go out and inevitably get themselves covid because they think they're making bold, individualist statement (as many of these people apparently do think) by not masking and not getting vaccinated.

we need to look at expanding healthcare;

Not happening in the short term.

complaining that people seek healthcare when they are ill.

It's not that they "seek healthcare". But that they expect to have critical resources like ICU beds available to them (and therefore, denied to others) so they can enjoy their "freedom" (to ignore common sense) -- that folks take issue with.

> Not happening in the short term.

Why not? It's an emergency. It's completely possible to fix this short term in a way that lets us move on without all these socially toxic and corrosive restrictions. Probably would cost an order of magnitude less, even.

It's completely possible to fix this short term

That's not what people in healthcare say. But hey, you can say whatever you want.

Because the front-line people in health care don't have the legislative or fiscal power to change the system they're working in. We need systematic update to healthcare system, not to blame the "people in healthcare" which are the least of all the problems.

Naw. This is an emergency, right? You don't need any of that. You just need people that are trainable enough to handle covid surges. Medical students, nurses, hell maybe even veterinarians... use your creativity.

If hospital capacity was an issue caused by covid surges, we'd have fixed it already.

Letting people not normally licensed to expand their scope and authority to practice on humans is a regulatory and legislative challenge. Healthcare workers badly need cooperation of regulators, legislators, and fiscal stakeholders of the industry to un-fuck the industry. Also capital can be better directed towards results rather than bloated administrators in a less regulatory burdened market.

And lockdowns, forced masking and vaccine passports aren’t a “regulatory and legislative challenge”? Really?

This is supposed to be an emergency, right? Give me a break. Covid specific healthcare capacity can easily be scaled up with the amount of resources we are pouring in this dumpster fire. Figure it out.

Agree on all points.

I wasn't, by even the remotest possible interpretation, "blaming people in healthcare".

So I find that a very, very weird implication for you to make.

Apologies, blame is probably too strong of a word.

I interpreted you were holding them accountable to answer the question of expanding/fixing health care in the short term. Clearly their answers are going to be in the context of their limited power to change the whole system without the cooperation of others. They need the cooperation of both the capital holders / owners of the health care industry as well as regulators and legislators. I think when you answering this question, they are answering it within the context of working within their current constraints, which can be quite tight.

To say they are the one to answer the question, in my opinion, is to shift the onus on them to answer it. In fact we need the feedback of these workers, and they're critical in us solving current problems. They need our cooperation. But I think framing the question as something they're supposed to answer, as you have done, narrows the focus on people not to be blamed for the constraints that hold them back and thus force an otherwise unreasonable answer.

No, just that they definitely would not agree with your view that the current system limitations are "completely possible to fix in the short term". For the simple reason that the most critical resource it depends on (trained people) is finite and highly inelastic. And is already contracting (i.e. they're are already starting to burn out and leave the profession).

Along with the second most critical resource that we expect them to have for us: empathy. Especially for those who won't vax.

This is an emergency. Find a way. It isn’t fair to blame the public and then force them into some dystopian “new normal” for years because a bunch of highly paid people can’t figure out how to fix emergency Covid hospitalization capacity.

If somebody says it isn’t possible, fire them and find somebody who can figure it out. It’s a fucking emergency, remember? It’s completely possible. Saying otherwise is an excuse. Figure it the fuck out.

Zero excuses.

(Or the more simple answer is there actually isn’t a problem with hospital capacity because otherwise we’d have fixed it. You know… because it is something that could be fixed… with money alone)