Excerpt:

However, in a crucial warning they note that:

There is little historical or empirical evidence upon which to base decisions regarding mass casualty respiratory failure and augmenting positive-pressure ventilation capacity.

Ventilation was therefore being recommended with NO consideration of the risks, and with little to no real evidence to support it.

In an editorial for the journal of Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness by Rubinson and Christian, published in 2013, they report on the allocation of mechanical ventilators during medical catastrophes:

To best use scarce resources, managing medical catastrophes requires deliberate transition from individual-centered to population-focused critical care. In the United States, the federal government provides neither permission nor definitive guidance for such modifications in care delivery. Although the federal government has oversight for practices related to health care–relevant federal statutes (eg, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services obligations by health care institutions) and civil rights protections, most health professionals’ clinical activities are overseen by states. In recognition of the states’ role, the New York State Workgroup developed a process to fairly and justly transition to population-focused care.

A number of hugely contentious legal & ethical red flags are being raised here, including the suspension of individual rights with priority being placed on collective protection via population-focused care.

...