Hacker News Reader

Comment by nradov | Hacker News Reader

I am aware of what last resort means. The point is that the total number of patients saved by ventilators is tiny relative to the worldwide death toll. It's great that doctors were able to save those people but it doesn't move the needle when we're looking at population level statistics.

View on HN

In my country (France), as of yesterday, 45 635 people have died in hospital (having access to a ventilator with few exceptions) and 19 780 outside (no ventilator). So in my country, the majority of covid19 victims had access to a ventilator and in France alone, ventilation has saved around 90 000 people (for 65k death). I'd be surprised if it wasn't the case elsewhere in Europe too.

On the 1.8 million dead from Covid19, 500k came from Europe, which means around 750k were saved by ventilators there. It is already not “tiny” and I'm counting Europe only.

What's the median and average age of those that died? How many re-existing conditions did they have?

It may sound super cynical and all, but perhaps we've forgotten that natural conclusion to life is death

That utilitarian view can make sense to some. But even a 55-year-old swimmer, cyclist and marathoner can die of this. It's way more than a pious "it was their time" thing. Let's all get past that one.

>even a 55-year-old swimmer, cyclist and marathoner can die of this

...but on average, they won't. It's way more than a pious "this exceptional case confirms an non-existing rule" thing. Let's get past the fear mongering.

That's a meaningless statement. They do die of it, at alarming rates. That's the whole point. Dismissing it with fatalism is fine for you, go ahead and contract it and take the risk. Just quit with the dismissive "everyone has to go sometime" irresponsible nonsense.

But it's not. 55 year olds are not dropping like flies like you're implying in your previous, false, statement [0][1].

Furthermore I have contracted it and guess what, I'm fine _now_ (sure we could argue about "long term effects" but at the moment that is big unknown). I'm also quite young so that played a part of course.

It's not dismissive to say everyone has to go sometime, it's just the truth.

If you're willing to sacrifice resources to give an extra few years to an already dying or sickly subject that's fair enough but pardon me if I beg to differ and look at the other side for the argument and focus on the repercussions for those that will not be _medically_ affected as much.

[0] https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m1327 [1] https://ourworldindata.org/mortality-risk-covid#case-fatalit...

Ok now that's just making things up. 35,000 55-64 dead in the US alone. Its a problem, and flat denial is not the same as argument. I'm done here.

>ventilation has saved around 90 000 people

Maybe 25’000 assuming two were saved for each one who died on it.

I don't understand what you mean.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25657043

Ok I've seen you other comment one afterwards. See my response there.

How many people die in hospital a non-covid year? That difference is the significant figure here.

Unfortunately I believe just being on a ventilator makes you very likely to die in the next few years once you're taken off it - but I'm not sure if that's because it damages your lungs or just because you had to be really sick to be put on one.

Depends on the country.

Some countries (eg. norway, there way an article in our local news a few days ago) usually don't put elderly, very ill people on ventilators, if the chances of survival are minimum. Some do.

The problem with different treatments and procedures also cause different statistics and comparing between countries is almost impossible.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com