Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

As I understand it, what's new is that it's being used under these circumstances. The ARDS algorithm would have these patients be intubated. Instead, they're putting these patients on HFC and letting them get hypoxic, reasoning that the mixture of damage caused by the infection and the vent is what's fatal.

Edit: Also, people have been avoiding HFC for COVID-19 because of aerosolization risks.



this is my understanding as well.

when i was an EMT if someone had O2 sats in the 50s and was conscious i would’ve told you that the pulse ox was broken. And it it wasn’t broken, i’d be yelling for a paramedic to tube my patient asap.


My non-medical understanding is that the long term damage threat of the disease is primarily due to to organs dealing with low oxygen for long periods of time. Would you say it's fair to say that an approach which saved more lives by not addressing would probably leave a greater proportion with organ damage?


honest answer? we have absolutely no idea, and whether or not we like it (mostly we don't like it), we're in the process of finding out.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: