[erobbins]

> This needs to work on an intubated patient, and be able to maintain a sanitary environment, neither of which it'll probably be able to do to the extent required by health and safety regulations.

I totally agree with you... but in the case where there are no respirators available at all, I'd rather have a 10% chance of secondary infection or contamination than just die.

I don't see a device like this as being a replacement for a $50k computer controlled machine, but as a stopgap in desperate emergencies.

[misnome]

> I totally agree with you... but in the case where there are no respirators available at all, I'd rather have a 10% chance of secondary infection or contamination than just die.

But what if that 10% requires much more and longer medical care, doctors attention etc, such that someone else dies because they didn’t get treatment? I’m not saying it definitely is, but presumably the tradeoffs from a medical perspective are about more than about one personal perspective (which of course is a rational perspective)