4 Comments

I'm in awe how you, Ms. Jessica, keep all of this straight and are able to speculate as to multiple explanations to account for multiple possibilities. Your record-keeping is crucial….

I found this article that may amount to so much blah, blah, blah, but am sharing in case it may have some value somehow:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15309576.2016.1197133

"Coping with Complexity: Internal Audit and Complex Governance"

--------------------

TYPO alert: More than one way to fix, but there's some sort of syntax problem in this sentence:

A big reason to care about the Elmhurst occupancy data is because the state’s hospitalization dataset missing a baseline for ALL hospitals in New York State and city (see figure 1 here).

Expand full comment

Fixed (I think).

Thanks for the article!

Expand full comment

Jessica can you get hold of data on bed linens, how their usage is accounted for, who cleans them etc? I’d assume that cleaning of sheets is tightly regulated, bed sheets in and out of the laundry (whether on or offsite) must be accounted for to ensure proper health and safety rules are followed. Also is it possible that transferring a patient internally counts (temporarily at least) for two beds if the used sheets haven’t been changed/processed through the laundry system? This could be an easy area to manipulate figures.

Expand full comment

That data would be interesting - and anyone can submit a FOIL for that - but there are more direct ways to get at the question, like the number of DAILY admissions. (I have multiple requests into HHC currently and they are hard to get records from, so I try to space out requests.)

What I strongly suspect hospitals did/were directed to do was count some or all current patients as new admissions, which made it look like there was an influx when really it was just rearranging. Transfers from nursing homes, hospice, homeless shelters etc could be another mechanism for sudden (but contrived) influx. That is exactly what I would expect to occur in a staged event involving a live-exercise/simulation with real "damaged ship" patients & precipice populations.

I already know from several studies - and from interviewing people - that NYC hospitals DID test existing patients right at the start.

This is the public hospitals only, including Elmhurst. One month of testing (March 6th 2020 to April 9th 2020):

18,147 patients tested in the timeframe; 11,599 (63.9%) reported positive. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8144284/

Does that seem strange to you? It does to me and I have pointed it out to associates and on Twitter many times and no one seems to be able to explain that rate. I'm supposed to accept "sudden spread" and "seasonal trigger" etc. :)

I tried to get all underlying data from the study linked above, to no avail (Study 2 here: https://www.woodhouse76.com/p/difficulties-obtaining-raw-data-for)

Look at the age group distribution for deaths: https://substack.com/profile/32813354-jessica-hockett/note/c-71472748?utm_source=notes-share-action&r=jjay2

Expand full comment