869
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2024
869 points (99.1% liked)
Technology
58062 readers
3080 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Did anyone actually die because of it? I couldn't find any reports on that. Maybe that's just because Google is useless, idk
Seriously doubt it. Elective surgeries were likely cancelled, which could certainly prolong suffering for some, but life saving surgeries can absolutely happen and do without computers.
It’s really hard to know for sure. Some percentage of elective surgeries or procedures end up detecting something life threatening. If the canceled procedures were rescheduled promptly then the outcomes probably haven’t changed in a meaningful way. But in the US, stuff is booked out months in advance so it may be impossible to get everyone rescheduled for something in the next week or two.
That's really hard to evaluate.
There were almost certainly a meaningful number of deaths in affected facilities, but a single weekend is a short enough sample that it's hard to say confidently without a lot of data. Stuff like temperature and air quality affects death rates, as does stuff like "it's already been hot for a week and the patients who were most vulnerable to heat already died". And there were a lot of tests and scans that were cancelled (or at least delayed) that would have caught something, or patients that couldn't get admitted who should have been, or a whole host of other things that are hard to measure.
Basically, there's enough actual variance and pseudo variance through factors that are hard to measure that it would take a pretty big swing to be definitive. But purely on the basis that quality of care is correlated to death rate and quality of care was meaningfully degraded, the reasonable assumption would be that there were some, even if providing data to back it would be extremely difficult.