A plant that makes 60% of the country's IV fluid supply was in the hurricane's path in NC

[thewayne]

They notified buyers that they'll only be supplying 40% of normal levels, and even that may be optimistic. I'm hoping they at least shipping already completed product to warehouses further away from the storm.

From the article: The plant would "... typically producing 1.5 million bags per day, according to the American Hospital Association. The dozens of sterile solutions Baxter makes at the facility are used for everything from intravenous rehydration and drug delivery to peritoneal dialysis used to treat kidney failure." It was pointed out that veterinary practices use the exact same solutions in their clinics, but order much smaller quantities and are likely to be harder hit.

Baxter said they have been able to contact most - but not all - of their employees. Communications are still rough. One problem with recovering the plant and getting it working again is that a bridge leading to the plant is down, plus the little inconvenience of all of their employees needing to put their lives back together.

https://arstechnica.com/health/2024/10/helene-ravaged-the-nc-plant-that-makes-60-of-the-countrys-iv-fluid-supply/

Comments

[richardf8]

Baby formula redux? We need more redundancy in our supply chains or we we're just hoing to keep getting screwed like this. Distribution of plants across regions should be a basic requirement for essential products like these.

[thewayne]

Part of the problem, I'm certain, is market consolidation. Not enough companies competing in the marketplace, which would distribute manufacturing somewhat. There could still be some concentration into the south because of cheap labor regardless.

[conuly]

I mean, maybe one single plant should not be making more than half of our supply of anything? Unless it's something purchased in super small quantities, like zambonis?

[thewayne]

I don't recall having had many zamboni supply problems in the last couple of decades. ;-)

[disneydream06]

Dear Baxter,
Perhaps you should have more then one factory for such an important product?
UGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Hugs, Jon

[thewayne]

I dropped a supplier for my antibody meds because they were consolidating all their supply. So instead of being able to get them from El Paso, they were now going to all be shipping from HOUSTON. Thank goodness Houston NEVER has any weather problems!

That was ages ago, and I'm now on my third supplier.

[disneydream06]

UGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[arlie]

In the last few decades, business has collectively optimized for immediate returns at the expense of reliability. This has been a fairly conscious decision; random people like me got to read paeans to just-in-time inventory in business adjacent magazines. They've also consolidated in a huge way; that has similar risks, in that when one of 100s is down, no one's more than inconvenienced, but when the sole supplier is down there's a shortage.

We saw the same phenomenon in financial products; some of us may remember the 2008 crash. That case was exacerbated by a government bailout - all parties now know they can socialize risk while privatizing profit.

In this case, having only a couple of plants in the country is probably the most efficient way to do things, when nothing goes wrong. See "economies of scale". And frankly, those of us in the US are fortunate that there is a plant in the US at all; there could have been only one plant, located in Lebanon. Or simply in some other country hit by a bad hurricane, which then prioritizes its own needs ahead of export.

No one makes a profit from picking the reliable course. If a group of people want local suppliers, diversified supply, etc., they need to subsidize such suppliers - or found the company themselves as some kind of non-profit. This is usually handled by governments on behalf of their citizens and residents. Even in the US, but rather less so than in other countries.

[silveradept]

Ooof. There are no safe places, of course, in a world of climate change, but when you end up with the possibility of major supply disruptions because the single plant in the country has problems, one would hope that something, whether it's regulation or good business sense, would kick in and you'd diversify so that in case of disaster, these kinds of situations wouldn't happen.

[thewayne]

Except there's no such thing as good business sense when MBAs, Wall Street, and vulture capitalists run the world.  There is only shareholder return.

[silveradept]

True. Which leaves regulation as the way to impose sensibility on the industry, and we know how much one political party would like to completely strip the government of any ability to regulate anything relating to business where more profit could be had.