I suspect what we really need to do, is work out what we really need to do


If, as is credible,  we see an exponential rise in cases, then a fairly predictable proportion of those are going to:


1 - have no effect discernable beyond a feeling akin to flue,


2 - have a moderately serious effect that may need basic medical intervention up to a level of ventilation (for breathing assistance)


3 - have a very serious effect needing full blown ITU capability to preserve life


4 - will peg out


We can't really do much with 1 or 4


We can reduce the cases in 3, by providing temporary facilities in 2


For me, that would sensibly suggest using resources we already have with minor modifications - as an example, we won't be having many visitors, so we have a stack of spare hotel capacity - and hotel bedrooms are ideal single person wards  - just need to deploy a bit of local breathing air and O2 - a basic compressor and pressure swing adsorber will give you both, probably matched to a mobile generator if required.


That presumes we can deploy ventilators - but keep in mind a basic ventilator is a nurse with a bagging set - the next step is a fluid amplification device  in order to govern pneumatic functions - circa 1960's technology with no moving parts - until we get to modern microprocessor sets.


The big problem to me seems to be numbers of available personnel - that will govern just what emergency facilities we need to deploy. No point having lots of field hospitals of we don't have enough Medico's to staff it


The next big problem will be the economics - can we afford to do this, and if not, should we do this.


Obviously the situation regarding the rise in the number of cases will improve, the less people go mincing about the place


Regards


OMS

I suspect what we really need to do, is work out what we really need to do


If, as is credible,  we see an exponential rise in cases, then a fairly predictable proportion of those are going to:


1 - have no effect discernable beyond a feeling akin to flue,


2 - have a moderately serious effect that may need basic medical intervention up to a level of ventilation (for breathing assistance)


3 - have a very serious effect needing full blown ITU capability to preserve life


4 - will peg out


We can't really do much with 1 or 4


We can reduce the cases in 3, by providing temporary facilities in 2


For me, that would sensibly suggest using resources we already have with minor modifications - as an example, we won't be having many visitors, so we have a stack of spare hotel capacity - and hotel bedrooms are ideal single person wards  - just need to deploy a bit of local breathing air and O2 - a basic compressor and pressure swing adsorber will give you both, probably matched to a mobile generator if required.


That presumes we can deploy ventilators - but keep in mind a basic ventilator is a nurse with a bagging set - the next step is a fluid amplification device  in order to govern pneumatic functions - circa 1960's technology with no moving parts - until we get to modern microprocessor sets.


The big problem to me seems to be numbers of available personnel - that will govern just what emergency facilities we need to deploy. No point having lots of field hospitals of we don't have enough Medico's to staff it


The next big problem will be the economics - can we afford to do this, and if not, should we do this.


Obviously the situation regarding the rise in the number of cases will improve, the less people go mincing about the place


Regards


OMS