Mtn_Guide said:

---

fooz said:

---

---

Come on. There needs to be a more rapid approval process for things like this.

---

It's second week of March. 9.5 months from discovery to widespread distribution is insanely rapid.

Nosmo said:

---

AgsMyDude said:

---

Nosmo said:

---

AgsMyDude said:

---

Quote:

---

If a person has no symptoms, how is testing going to help?

---

Many people are asymptomatic carriers. You can easily spread the disease and not show any symptoms. If you test positive without symptoms you still need to be isolated to avoid giving it to others who may be effected.

---

Then why didn't they test Cruz?

---

That's the million-dollar question. Our testing is significantly lower than any other major country with cases.

https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2020/3/6/21168087/cdc-coronavirus-test-kits-covid-19

Quote:

---

Mar 6, 2020

But it starts with testing. To date, per an investigation in the Atlantic, fewer than 2,000 people have been tested for Covid-19 in the US a number far behind other developed countries. South Korea, for example, has tested more than 140,000 people and has even set up drive-though testing stations for people to access.

---

---

So you are saying the quote from the Cruz story saying testing before symptoms is ineffective, is not accurate?

Quote:

---

He also said his situation does not meet the CDC criteria to self-quarantine, and he cannot be tested since testing is not effective before symptoms manifest.

---

---

Well, sort of. Cruz could never get symptoms. He can carry the disease for weeks without any. He'd still test positive during that time

cisgenderedAggie said:

---

Mtn_Guide said:

---

fooz said:

---

---

Come on. There needs to be a more rapid approval process for things like this.

---

It's second week of March. 9.5 months from discovery to widespread distribution is insanely rapid.

---

And theoretically skipping some safety steps. The potential long term impacts from the vaccine could be unknown for some time when the process is rushed.

For elderly I could see it being worth the risk. For under 40, it could be worth considering passing on a vaccine, at least initially.

PJYoung said:

---

Italy just announced their #s for today:

Italy 9,172 +1,797

---

https://lab.gedidigital.it/gedi-visual/2020/coronavirus-i-contagi-in-italia/

Italy reporting 4,316 hospitalizations w/ symptoms.

They have 9,172 total cases.

47% hospitalization rate.

Not good.

you Test it in animals (1 month), while ramping up a human trial (safety only, healthy volunteers to look for acute toxicity; 3-4 months to get a serviceable result while continuing long term safety for a year). Then wider spread safety/efficacy in target populations at risk (6-8 months for serviceable result on safety, maybe faster given the scare). Then you have to manufacture and distribute (6-8 months for larger scale?)

Assumes absolutely no missteps or hiccups, still break-neck speed.

Meanwhile, the University of Utah Hospital is erecting tents with negative pressure to deal with Covid 19 screening and avoid contaminating the main emergency/urgent care reception areas. They were handing out masks and having people use hand sanitizer, forbidding entry to all but immediate family members to the ER today. We took an elderly neighbor up there this morning due to symptoms consistent with the virus. Staff said on the news they have the capability to erect many more tents as needed.

New deaths in China over the last six days, in chronological order: 38, 31, 30, 28, 27, 23. Total China deaths at 3123. China topped out at around 150 daily deaths.

New deaths outside China: 48, 53, 69, 78, 71, 202. Total 686. (looks like multiple days worth of data rolled in to the WHO database today)

New US deaths: 4, 3, 1, 1, 0, 0. Total 11 (again, I'm using WHO numbers for the purpose of this update. I'm not sure why they differ from news reports but I'll keep using them to stay consistent).

New Italy deaths: 28, 27, 41, 49, 37, 132. Total 366.

Looks like something outta ET

IrishTxAggie said:

---

Mabel Choate said:

---

IrishTxAggie said:

---

It's the flu. Know how many people died of the flu in the US last year; About 56,000... This is nothing. Just fear mongering.

---

OOPS!

---

You see 56,000 deaths in the US from this yet? No...Then STFU. Feel free to bump it after that.

---

We need to get to 1,200 deaths by the end of March before it can be as bad as the flu. Then, do it again in April. Then, keep it up at 1,200 deaths per month for 10 consecutive months after. Then, it will at least approach flu numbers.

I guess the CT scans that China is doing does not involve the injection of contrast dye? (This helps to show up parts of the body not always clearly seen, like blood vessels, the kidneys and liver.)

That stuff is only recommended to be injected like once every 5 years or something...the side effects of the dye is not very good and can have health risks.

InternetFan02 said:

---

jpd301 said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

Unrolled thread for easier reading:

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1236680328875474944.html

---

The thread unroll and the NY Times interview is a must read.

Snips from the NYT interview

Quote:

---

Wait "whip you through a CT scan"?

Each machine did maybe 200 a day. Five, 10 minutes a scan. Maybe even partial scans. A typical hospital in the West does one or two an hour. And not X-rays; they could come up normal, but a CT would show the "ground-glass opacities" they were looking for.

What were mild, severe and critical? We think of "mild" as like a minor cold.
No. "Mild" was a positive test, fever, cough maybe even pneumonia, but not needing oxygen. "Severe" was breathing rate up and oxygen saturation down, so needing oxygen or a ventilator. "Critical" was respiratory failure or multi-organ failure.

So saying 80 percent of all cases are mild doesn't mean what we thought.
I'm Canadian. This is the Wayne Gretzky of viruses people didn't think it was big enough or fast enough to have the impact it does.

---

---

what is the mechanism for ramping up to 200 CT scans per day per machine here? Military take over of the nation's CT machines? I'm assuming the technology is the same here and China and we do 1-2 per hour due to less demand and also the paperwork, billing and safety.

---

You also probably don't need the same level of data on the scan if you are looking for COVID-19 as opposed to say, a brain tumor. Just as soon as you see the "ground-glass opacity", end the scan and test the patient for the virus.

AgsMyDude said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

Italy just announced their #s for today:

Italy 9,172 +1,797

---

https://lab.gedidigital.it/gedi-visual/2020/coronavirus-i-contagi-in-italia/

Italy reporting 4,316 hospitalizations w/ symptoms.

They have 9,172 total cases.

47% hospitalization rate.

Not good.

---

They also smoke like chimneys over there so higher hospitalization rates for a lifestyle choice that weakens the immune system isn't a shocker.

Mabel Choate said:

---

IrishTxAggie said:

---

It's the flu. Know how many people died of the flu in the US last year; About 56,000... This is nothing. Just fear mongering.

---

OOPS!

---

Why OOPS? How many deaths in US this year for CV?

https://www.corriere.it/cronache/20_marzo_09/coronavirus-scegliamo-chi-curare-chi-no-come-ogni-guerra-196f7d34-617d-11ea-8f33-90c941af0f23.shtml


Interview Salaroli, anesthesiologist resuscitator in Bergamo, Italy talking about the hospitals being overrun:

Quote:

---

Why does it count so much?

"In addition to age and the general picture, the third element is the patient's ability to recover from an intensive care operation."

What are we talking about?


This Covid-19-induced is an interstitial pneumonia, a very aggressive form that impacts so much on the oxygenation of the blood. The most affected patients become hypoxic, that is, they no longer have sufficient quantities of oxygen in the body .

When does the time to choose come?

Immediately afterwards. We are obliged to do it. Within a couple of days, at most. Non-invasive ventilation is only a transition phase. Since unfortunately there is disproportion between hospital resources, ICU beds, and critically ill people, not all are intubated. "

Then what happens?

It becomes necessary to ventilate them mechanically. Those on which you choose to continue are all intubated and pronated, or put on your stomach, because this maneuver can promote ventilation of the lower areas of the lung .

Is there a written rule?

At the moment, despite what I read, no. As a rule, even if I realize that it is a bad word, patients with serious cardiorespiratory pathologies, and people with severe coronary artery problems, are carefully evaluated, because they tolerate acute hypoxia poorly and have little chance of surviving the phase criticism ".

Nothing else?

"If a person between 80 and 95 has severe respiratory failure, you probably won't proceed. If you have a multi-organic failure of more than three vital organs, it means that you have a one hundred percent mortality rate. He is now gone.

Do you let him go?

"This is also a terrible sentence. But unfortunately it is true. We are not in a position to tempt what are called miracles. It is reality .

And you doctors, can you endure this situation?

Some come out crushed. It happens to the primary, and to the newly arrived boy who finds himself in the early morning having to decide the fate of a human being. On a large scale, I repeat it .

In the big room?

"Exact. Many of my colleagues are accusing this situation. It is not only the workload, but the emotional one, which is devastating. I saw crying nurses with thirty years of experience behind them, people who have nervous breakdown and suddenly tremble. You don't know what's going on in hospitals, that's why I decided to talk to her. "

Can you give me an example?

"Normally the call for a heart attack is processed in minutes. Now it can happen that you wait even for an hour or more .

---

Agsrback12 said:

---

IrishTxAggie said:

---

Mabel Choate said:

---

IrishTxAggie said:

---

It's the flu. Know how many people died of the flu in the US last year; About 56,000... This is nothing. Just fear mongering.

---

OOPS!

---

You see 56,000 deaths in the US from this yet? No...Then STFU. Feel free to bump it after that.

---

We need to get to 1,200 deaths by the end of March before it can be as bad as the flu. Then, do it again in April. Then, keep it up at 1,200 deaths per month for 10 consecutive months after. Then, it will at least approach flu numbers.

---

U may get your wish and then some. Sounds like a lot of the (rational) fear has to do with the severity of the illness among a large swath of the population (putting pressure on the hospital systems) and the ease of transmission

I'm no doc, but I can do simple math

AgsMyDude said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

Italy just announced their #s for today:

Italy 9,172 +1,797

---

https://lab.gedidigital.it/gedi-visual/2020/coronavirus-i-contagi-in-italia/

Italy reporting 4,316 hospitalizations w/ symptoms.

They have 9,172 total cases.

47% hospitalization rate.

Not good.

---

There are missing data points before you should post "not good."

Age of those in the hospital?

What criteria do they use to hospitalize someone?

How much testing are they doing?

I can probably think of a few more if I put my mind to it.

Proposition Joe said:

---

I can juggle 4 baseballs at once. If someone throws me two tennis balls it's less than the number of baseballs I am currently juggling -- that doesn't mean I can juggle all 6.

---

What? Are you a freaking ******? How the hell can you not juggle all 6? That's nothing...

k2aggie07 said:

---

Looks like something outta ET

---

It was surreal. ER staff gowned and masked up, took her and then asked me screening questions and telling me to go home until they had diagnosed her and determined disposition. They would not allow me to enter the hospital ER with her, telling me to go home and standby for a phone call. They are not taking this lightly.

Rapier108 said:

---

AgsMyDude said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

Italy just announced their #s for today:

Italy 9,172 +1,797

---

https://lab.gedidigital.it/gedi-visual/2020/coronavirus-i-contagi-in-italia/

Italy reporting 4,316 hospitalizations w/ symptoms.

They have 9,172 total cases.

47% hospitalization rate.

Not good.

---

There are missing data points before you should post "not good."

Age of those in the hospital?

What criteria do they use to hospitalize someone?

How much testing are they doing?

I can probably think of a few more if I put my mind to it.

---

No I'm pretty sure with all the subset data points you want to do to filter out the data you don't want the end result of 47% hospitalization rate of 9,172 cases is always going to be "not good."

Proposition Joe said:

---

Why is it so hard for people to grasp that it isn't this OR the flu.

The flu is still around. The flu is still going to kill.

This is ON TOP OF the flu.

I can juggle 4 baseballs at once. If someone throws me two tennis balls it's less than the number of baseballs I am currently juggling -- that doesn't mean I can juggle all 6.

"Doesn't cause as many deaths as the flu" is some of the stupidest logic to use regarding the virus. That's not to say the virus will or won't be widespread in the US, but it's like comparing it to how many people run red lights every day... So what!?

---

Your argument is not great. In terms of things to worry about hurting/killing us the Coronavirus is like putting a feather on top of an elephant. It's not that significant an addition to the human condition.

WoMD said:

---

lead said:

---

Quote:

---

My fear is utility workers, water, sewer, garbage, power, natural gas being off work for extended time. There will have to be some way for these types to work around this mess.

---

. Why would these people not go to work?

---

Not this **** again...

---

I work in one of these industries; we have been following the situation closely since January.

Proposition Joe said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

AgsMyDude said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

Italy just announced their #s for today:

Italy 9,172 +1,797

---

https://lab.gedidigital.it/gedi-visual/2020/coronavirus-i-contagi-in-italia/

Italy reporting 4,316 hospitalizations w/ symptoms.

They have 9,172 total cases.

47% hospitalization rate.

Not good.

---

There are missing data points before you should post "not good."

Age of those in the hospital?

What criteria do they use to hospitalize someone?

How much testing are they doing?

I can probably think of a few more if I put my mind to it.

---

No I'm pretty sure with all the subset data points you want to do to filter out the data you don't want the end result of 47% hospitalization rate of 9,172 cases is always going to be "not good."

---

If those 47% are people 70+ the vast majority of whom smoke, it actually is because it explains why and those are the very people one would expect to be severely ill.

aginlakeway said:

---

KorbinDallas said:

---

mathguy86 said:

---

KidDoc said:

---

I've been pretty much correct on this whole course. My next prediction is widespread school closures & work from home in the next month and more stock market nuttiness. I hope to buy in some more stocks in about a month.

---

Widespread school closures will be a big problem. It will create a cascade effect. . Too many parents work and rely on day care for toddlers and effectively day care for K-8. Unsupervised kids at home won't work and will force at least one parent to take off work. But work at home you say. Thats great for the white collar worker who can, but the blue collar worker can't. That means taking leave of some kind. And if they don't have any that means unpaid leave. And way too many blue collar workers live paycheck to paycheck. What happens to their debt service when the paycheck stops?

If the Govt (local and or state) decides to close schools the Feds better have a plan to keep money flowing.

---

My fear is utility workers, water, sewer, garbage, power, natural gas being off work for extended time. There will have to be some way for these types to work around this mess.

---

Those are the two key words ...

---

Unfortunately lots of people's fears are coming true right now. How much has happened that everyone said couldn't or wouldn't? Remember how everyone said "our hygiene is better, it won't spread here", "this won't disrupt trade" and all that stuff?

I work in utilities and you can bet my ass will be at work if I'm not sick and risking spread to those around me. I also know those working under me don't have the same view. Those with kids will be in a bind if schools close.

Maybe I'm being irrational but if your inside the industries you see the weaknesses.

when the italian outbreak is adding 1800 cases a day, it's already enormous

they are finding the bad cases because they are showing up on their doorstep

also, what % of tests administered come back positive?

you want the % of positives as opposed to total tests to be single digit

Italy is a disaster, but i think it more shows how quickly a relatively undetected outbreak can emerge and overwhelm a system

WHICH IS WHY AGGRESSIVE TESTING AND CONTRACT TRACING IS KEY EARLY

i would feel so much better about this is we had a diagnostic that could come back with results in, say, 6 hours and was widely available in the metro areas

Rapier108 said:

---

Proposition Joe said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

AgsMyDude said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

Italy just announced their #s for today:

Italy 9,172 +1,797

---

https://lab.gedidigital.it/gedi-visual/2020/coronavirus-i-contagi-in-italia/

Italy reporting 4,316 hospitalizations w/ symptoms.

They have 9,172 total cases.

47% hospitalization rate.

Not good.

---

There are missing data points before you should post "not good."

Age of those in the hospital?

What criteria do they use to hospitalize someone?

How much testing are they doing?

I can probably think of a few more if I put my mind to it.

---

No I'm pretty sure with all the subset data points you want to do to filter out the data you don't want the end result of 47% hospitalization rate of 9,172 cases is always going to be "not good."

---

If those 47% are people 70+ the vast majority of whom smoke, it actually is because it explains why and those are the very people one would expect to be severely ill.

---

Wouldn't that hospitalization rate still be crazy high? Even if every single case was a 70+ old person who smoked (not likely), a 47% hospitalization rate would be insane. The seasonal flu hospitalizes ~10% of symptomatic 65+ year olds in the US (and kills 0.8% of the symptomatic).

Rapier108 said:

---

Proposition Joe said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

AgsMyDude said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

Italy just announced their #s for today:

Italy 9,172 +1,797

---

https://lab.gedidigital.it/gedi-visual/2020/coronavirus-i-contagi-in-italia/

Italy reporting 4,316 hospitalizations w/ symptoms.

They have 9,172 total cases.

47% hospitalization rate.

Not good.

---

There are missing data points before you should post "not good."

Age of those in the hospital?

What criteria do they use to hospitalize someone?

How much testing are they doing?

I can probably think of a few more if I put my mind to it.

---

No I'm pretty sure with all the subset data points you want to do to filter out the data you don't want the end result of 47% hospitalization rate of 9,172 cases is always going to be "not good."

---

If those 47% are people 70+ the vast majority of whom smoke, it actually is because it explains why and those are the very people one would expect to be severely ill.

---

Except you don't know that the vast majority of those people are 70+ and/or smoke. It's conjecture.

Now, you can say we don't have ALL the data to make an exact analysis and that's true -- and we probably won't until this is all over.

So I can absolutely understand not panicking over the %, but to discount it by adding purely speculative subsets is statistically unsound.

Rapier108 said:

---

Proposition Joe said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

AgsMyDude said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

Italy just announced their #s for today:

Italy 9,172 +1,797

---

https://lab.gedidigital.it/gedi-visual/2020/coronavirus-i-contagi-in-italia/

Italy reporting 4,316 hospitalizations w/ symptoms.

They have 9,172 total cases.

47% hospitalization rate.

Not good.

---

There are missing data points before you should post "not good."

Age of those in the hospital?

What criteria do they use to hospitalize someone?

How much testing are they doing?

I can probably think of a few more if I put my mind to it.

---

No I'm pretty sure with all the subset data points you want to do to filter out the data you don't want the end result of 47% hospitalization rate of 9,172 cases is always going to be "not good."

---

If those 47% are people 70+ the vast majority of whom smoke, it actually is because it explains why and those are the very people one would expect to be severely ill.

---

It would also match why things were so bad in China for a few weeks.

it is insane

but something is weird if the % of severe cases doesn't match up with Japan, South Korea, etc.

to me i interpret this as the outbreak is huge and the denominator of cases is going to continue to skyrocket

either that or the cohort is different in some fundamental ways

i'd really like to see data on who all is being hospitalized. i'd assume we get something next week.

How fake news can be deadly.

dragmagpuff said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Proposition Joe said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

AgsMyDude said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

Italy just announced their #s for today:

Italy 9,172 +1,797

---

https://lab.gedidigital.it/gedi-visual/2020/coronavirus-i-contagi-in-italia/

Italy reporting 4,316 hospitalizations w/ symptoms.

They have 9,172 total cases.

47% hospitalization rate.

Not good.

---

There are missing data points before you should post "not good."

Age of those in the hospital?

What criteria do they use to hospitalize someone?

How much testing are they doing?

I can probably think of a few more if I put my mind to it.

---

No I'm pretty sure with all the subset data points you want to do to filter out the data you don't want the end result of 47% hospitalization rate of 9,172 cases is always going to be "not good."

---

If those 47% are people 70+ the vast majority of whom smoke, it actually is because it explains why and those are the very people one would expect to be severely ill.

---

Wouldn't that hospitalization rate still be crazy high? Even if every single case was a 70+ old person who smoked (not likely), a 47% hospitalization rate would be insane. The seasonal flu hospitalizes ~10% of symptomatic 65+ year olds in the US (and kills 0.8% of the symptomatic).

---

But then you can continually add speculative subsets until you get a % that fits your preconceived notion ("well how many had traveled in the previous 14 days?", "well how many had asthma as a child?", "well how many were from a specific region?"), or the sample size becomes so small you can deem it irrelevant.

Is it reason to panic? Not without more specific data.

But discounting a 47% hospitalization rate on 9100 cases... Hell it'd be more logical to just attack the #'s as bogus than to attack them as maybe not significant.

VaultingChemist said:

---

How fake news can be deadly.

---

Without a doubt if someone posted that to Twitter, there would be deaths here as well.

After all, people eat Tide Pods because it is on Twitter.

VaultingChemist said:

---

How fake news can be deadly.

---

Reminds me of the stories during Prohibition when scores of people would die from bathtub gin and other homemade substitutes for alcohol. Rotgut liquor.

Proposition Joe said:

---

dragmagpuff said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Proposition Joe said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

AgsMyDude said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

Italy just announced their #s for today:

Italy 9,172 +1,797

---

https://lab.gedidigital.it/gedi-visual/2020/coronavirus-i-contagi-in-italia/

Italy reporting 4,316 hospitalizations w/ symptoms.

They have 9,172 total cases.

47% hospitalization rate.

Not good.

---

There are missing data points before you should post "not good."

Age of those in the hospital?

What criteria do they use to hospitalize someone?

How much testing are they doing?

I can probably think of a few more if I put my mind to it.

---

No I'm pretty sure with all the subset data points you want to do to filter out the data you don't want the end result of 47% hospitalization rate of 9,172 cases is always going to be "not good."

---

If those 47% are people 70+ the vast majority of whom smoke, it actually is because it explains why and those are the very people one would expect to be severely ill.

---

Wouldn't that hospitalization rate still be crazy high? Even if every single case was a 70+ old person who smoked (not likely), a 47% hospitalization rate would be insane. The seasonal flu hospitalizes ~10% of symptomatic 65+ year olds in the US (and kills 0.8% of the symptomatic).

---

But then you can continually add speculative subsets until you get a % that fits your preconceived notion ("well how many had traveled in the previous 14 days?", "well how many had asthma as a child?", "well how many were from a specific region?"), or the sample size becomes so small you can deem it irrelevant.

Is it reason to panic? Not without more specific data.

But discounting a 47% hospitalization rate on 9100 cases... Hell it'd be more logical to just attack the #'s as bogus than to attack them as maybe not significant.

---

No one is discounting it. I and others would like to see more information than just a single data point.

AgsMyDude said:

---

https://www.corriere.it/cronache/20_marzo_09/coronavirus-scegliamo-chi-curare-chi-no-come-ogni-guerra-196f7d34-617d-11ea-8f33-90c941af0f23.shtml


Interview Salaroli, anesthesiologist resuscitator in Bergamo, Italy talking about the hospitals being overrun:

Quote:

---

Why does it count so much?

"In addition to age and the general picture, the third element is the patient's ability to recover from an intensive care operation."

What are we talking about?


This Covid-19-induced is an interstitial pneumonia, a very aggressive form that impacts so much on the oxygenation of the blood. The most affected patients become hypoxic, that is, they no longer have sufficient quantities of oxygen in the body .

When does the time to choose come?

Immediately afterwards. We are obliged to do it. Within a couple of days, at most. Non-invasive ventilation is only a transition phase. Since unfortunately there is disproportion between hospital resources, ICU beds, and critically ill people, not all are intubated. "

Then what happens?

It becomes necessary to ventilate them mechanically. Those on which you choose to continue are all intubated and pronated, or put on your stomach, because this maneuver can promote ventilation of the lower areas of the lung .

Is there a written rule?

At the moment, despite what I read, no. As a rule, even if I realize that it is a bad word, patients with serious cardiorespiratory pathologies, and people with severe coronary artery problems, are carefully evaluated, because they tolerate acute hypoxia poorly and have little chance of surviving the phase criticism ".

Nothing else?

"If a person between 80 and 95 has severe respiratory failure, you probably won't proceed. If you have a multi-organic failure of more than three vital organs, it means that you have a one hundred percent mortality rate. He is now gone.

Do you let him go?

"This is also a terrible sentence. But unfortunately it is true. We are not in a position to tempt what are called miracles. It is reality .

And you doctors, can you endure this situation?

Some come out crushed. It happens to the primary, and to the newly arrived boy who finds himself in the early morning having to decide the fate of a human being. On a large scale, I repeat it .

In the big room?

"Exact. Many of my colleagues are accusing this situation. It is not only the workload, but the emotional one, which is devastating. I saw crying nurses with thirty years of experience behind them, people who have nervous breakdown and suddenly tremble. You don't know what's going on in hospitals, that's why I decided to talk to her. "

Can you give me an example?

"Normally the call for a heart attack is processed in minutes. Now it can happen that you wait even for an hour or more .

---

---

That sounds horrific.

EDIT: there's a scene from India in the documentary on Netflix called 'Pandemic' where they take a patient that was previously near death from the flu off of the vent and we watch him struggle to breathe on his own. It's almost unwatchable. I can't imagine being a caregiver having to wait for somebody to basically suffocate to death because you don't have enough capacity to save his life.