If this were about "sides", then yes. But the issue we had a few weeks ago was lack of available information. I can tell you every doctor I talked to had a similar perspective then. If this information was disseminated to people on the front lines we could have shifted momentum sooner and implored for testing sooner. This is the problem with our health care system. The ones planning and the ones doing are often not privy to the same information. If hospitals were really planning for this for months, as my hospital admins have repeatedly told us, then why the hell are we in this situation now? Who the hell let this happen? Where is the PPE? Where are the tests? How can an economic system as robust as health care sit idly by until we are overcome with the reality of being overwhelmed? These are the questions our healthcare system will be in trial for when this is over.
To focus on the bolded (where are the test).
I've read no less than 20 articles, likely closer to 30-40 on the whole testing debacle. I was pretty floored by some of it. Anyway, several articles were good and factual, many were simply finger pointing attempts from a political perspective. To summarize what I've read collectively, the delays in test were a result of the following
1. Red tape. In short, our regs are bloated and slow.
2. We needed samples of the virus, and they were simply very difficult to get (China didn't help either).
3. The CDC made a choice to create their own tests (which isn't unusual), and the biggest reason IIRC this time was they found inclusive results from testing the WHO tests which were German in origin I think. The CDC chose to use 3 different genes (I think it was genes but don't quote me, it was 3 different something) than the German tests.
4. The reagents were hard to come by (IIRC, most were from Europe)
5. Testing equipment and labs are incredibly different. Hospitals have different equipment than labs, normal labs have different equipment than research, etc. Most testing is at the local level, managed by state, county, etc. so there was simply no standardize means to get everyone on the same page and able to test the same way.
6. Heavy reliance on "gov" and lack of established partnership (or even control) over some private industry. I'm not talking about reg control, I'm talking about "you're going to do this now" type of control. SKO was lightning fast in part because of their partnerships with the private sector instead of heavy reliance on internal gov.
In short, the above are fundamental deficiencies and problems. They are not "this administration" type problems. Some of the problems are long standing deficiencies and reliances, others are unique to the situation. We're learning a lot unfortunately, and I hope this stimulates long term change. The FDA has been a shit show for decades and needs an overhaul. We need to have standardization in labs. We need less reliance on foreign entities. We need to learn from SKO's partnership model.
The Atlantic had a decent article, but was a little finger pointy... The best were scientific journals. A quick google will give you a ton of choices if you're interested.
