Connect with us

News

Elon Musk sets the record straight over allegations that Tesla donated no ventilators to CA hospitals

(Credit: Henry Ford News/Twitter)

Published

on

Tesla CEO Elon Musk has set the record straight about his companies’ ventilator donations to hospitals in CA. Musk’s clarification comes on the heels of reports alleging that no hospitals in California have actually received any ventilators from the CEO or any of his companies. 

On April 14, the Sacramento Bee published an editorial about Elon Musk’s initiative to donate ventilators to California hospitals. The editorial criticized Musk’s decision to supply non-invasive ventilators to hospitals, which were allegedly dangerous to use for COVID-19 patients. The piece’s author, whose name was not listed by the Bee, called the initiative a “fiasco” and alleged that “not one unit has been delivered – and Musk likely never had the real ventilators our hospitals need.” 

The editorial appears to have spawned similar articles alleging the same point: that despite Musk’s commitment to donate ventilators, not one has reached a California hospital. On Thursday, a CNN report was published, citing a quote from a spokesperson of the California governor’s Office of Emergency Services. The allegations were similar to those in the Sacramento Bee’s editorial. 

“Elon Musk and his team told the state that he had procured ventilators and wanted to distribute them directly to hospitals with shortages. The Administration is communicating every day with hospitals across the state about their ventilator supply and to date we have not heard of any hospital system that has received a ventilator directly from Tesla or Musk,” the spokesperson noted.

Advertisement

In response to CNN‘s recent report, Elon Musk provided screenshots of Tesla’s communication with hospitals in California, clearly indicating that ventilator donations had been made. Musk also urged CA Governor Gavin Newsom to address the misunderstanding. 

In one of Musk’s shared emails, Tesla asked Phillip Franks of the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services if any donated ventilators went into use. Franks noted in a reply on March 27 that the donated units performed well during testing, and that the machines will be put into use the next day.

Musk also shared a message from Tom Parker, the CEO of Mammoth Hospital in CA. Parker thanked Musk and Tesla for ventilators that were donated to the hospital, stating that the units will be invaluable as COVID-19 cases in the state increased. “These ventilators will be quickly deployed in our hospital in anticipation of the coming wave of patients who will be suffering from the most severe effects of COVID-19,” Parker wrote. 

At the core of the criticism against Elon Musk and Tesla’s donations is argument that most of the units donated thus far are non-invasive ventilators. While these units cannot perform as well as the $35,000 invasive ventilators used for critically-ill patients, the non-invasive units can still be used as backup ventilators for those that are not severely ill from the coronavirus. And during a global pandemic, where cases are rising rapidly, every ventilator counts. 

Advertisement

Also neglected by the Sacramento Bee‘s editorial and CNN‘s report is the fact that the non-invasive ventilators donated by Tesla can actually be reconfigured to work for severely-ill COVID-19 patients. An example of this was done in Mouth Sinai NYC, which also received ventilators from the electric car maker. These efforts from the Mount Sinai team show one thing: the non-invasive ventilators from Tesla are invaluable in the fight against COVID-19, contrary to what poorly-researched critics would allege. 

Simon is an experienced automotive reporter with a passion for electric cars and clean energy. Fascinated by the world envisioned by Elon Musk, he hopes to make it to Mars (at least as a tourist) someday. For stories or tips--or even to just say a simple hello--send a message to his email, simon@teslarati.com or his handle on X, @ResidentSponge.

Advertisement
Comments

Investor's Corner

Tesla short sellers win big after shares fall after earnings

Published

on

A red Tesla Roadster driving around a turn
(Credit: Tesla)

Tesla short sellers won big following the company’s massive fall on Wall Street after it reported subpar Earnings on Wednesday.

Tesla short sellers collected about $4.12 billion in single-day profits on Thursday, according to BloombergShares fell as much as 15 percent during Thursday’s session. It closed as one of the worst days for Tesla on Wall Street in the past three years.

Investors sold off the stock after Tesla said it would aggressively direct its spending toward AI and its Optimus robot project. The company had record revenues, which were driven by one of the strongest quarters in terms of vehicle deliveries in company history.

However, it missed EPS estimates by reporting just $0.33, a far cry from the $0.53 analysts expected.

S3 Partners reported that about 3 percent of Tesla’s outstanding stock is sold short. Managing Director at S3, Ihor Dusaniwsky, provided the short seller’s potential profit, as well as another figure: shorts have likely had paper gains of $8.92 billion this year, as Tesla shares are down 30 percent in 2026.

Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2026 earnings results: miss on EPS, beat on revenue

Tesla has burned short sellers many times in the past, but the company’s latest Earnings Call was a chance for those skeptics to taste some payback. Although the company gave some very transparent information regarding future projects, the rollout of Robotaxi, Optimus, and Semi, many investors took their profits on Thursday.

Notable short sellers like Michael Burry have been transparent about their skepticism around Tesla shares. Burry just revealed three weeks ago that he had opened up a new short on the stock, stating he shorted Tesla shares at $416.22. “Happy it jumped back to this level,” he said in a blog post.

At the time of publication, Tesla shares were down about 3 percent and the stock was trading at $309.92.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla door handle saga gets its latest chapter and a big change is coming

Published

on

Credit: Tesla | Model 3 Owner's Manual

Tesla’s long-standing saga regarding its door handles and a manual release has entered its latest chapter, and as a result, a big change is coming.

On Friday, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) denied Tesla’s petition that was seeking a defect investigation into roughly 180,000 Model 3 vehicles for an issue involving the emergency mechanical door release.

NHTSA said that Tesla’s petition did not present evidence of a safety-related defect in the door handles or their emergency releases. Instead, the agency determined that it would rather solve the issue of the lack of labeling or location of emergency mechanical door releases and the federal safety rules that govern them.

Essentially, the NHTSA wants to create and enforce rules that would require automakers to make emergency door latch releases more clearly labeled in a car. Despite a Tesla having manual door releases on all four passenger doors, many people do not know they exist or how they work.

Tesla addresses door handle complaints with simple engineering fix

In recent times, Tesla has faced some criticism involving its door handles, specifically because some occupants have reported that they are unable to exit their vehicles after losing power. The door handles on a Tesla are electronically operated, but in the event that the 12V battery dies, there is a manual release that can be used.

The NHTSA only identified a single complaint involving the mechanical door releases: a 2022 Model 3 owner said the release was concealed and unlabeled after the vehicle lost power after a front-end collision. It has also already started to create a separate rulemaking process to make emergency door-egress systems more obvious.

It should be noted that all Teslas have mechanical emergency door releases, but they are placed in various locations as the vehicles have aged and been redesigned from year to year. Refer to the safety manual for your vehicle if you have any confusion about where the emergency releases are and how they work.

Continue Reading

News

SpaceX Starship Flight 13 faces wrath of the Texas skies

SpaceX pushed Starship Flight 13 to Friday, blaming weather instead of the previous engine issues.

Published

on

By

SpaceX called off Thursday’s launch attempt of Starship Flight 13, pushing the mission to Friday because of weather tied to Tropical Storm Bertha. The company confirmed the delay on X, noting “Now targeting Friday, July 24 for Starship’s thirteenth flight test, due to weather. A key objective for the flight test is to get clear imagery from the ground of Starship’s heatshield as it flies at a higher dynamic pressure during ascent, which won’t be possible with today’s weather conditions.”

This is the second delay for Flight 13 in two weeks. SpaceX first tried to launch the mission on July 16, but the countdown ended in an automated abort at T-0 when four of Super Heavy Booster 20’s 33 Raptor engines failed to ignite. Musk said at the time that two Raptors would need to be removed and replaced, as Teslarati reported. The company spent the following week destacking Ship 40 and Booster 20, swapping engines, and running leak checks before restacking the vehicle on Pad 2 Wednesday night, according to Spaceflight Now’s live coverage.

Elon Musk debunks $52 billion SpaceX-NVIDIA GPU deal

 

Unlike the engine problem, Thursday’s delay has nothing to do with the hardware. SpaceX wants clean footage of Starship’s heat shield captured from the ground as the vehicle flies through max dynamic pressure, something the storm’s cloud cover over South Texas would not allow. The company said visibility should improve for Friday’s attempt, with the same 90 minute window opening at 5:45 p.m. CT.

Flight 13 will be the second outing for the V3 versions of Starship and Super Heavy, following their debut on Flight 12 in May. The mission carries 20 production Starlink V3 satellites, the first time SpaceX has flown operational satellites rather than mass simulators on Starship. Six of those satellites are fitted with cameras to inspect the heat shield from a different angle during ascent, giving engineers a second data source beyond the ground imagery the weather is currently blocking.

Booster 20 will attempt a boostback burn and a splashdown landing burn in the Gulf of America, while Ship 40 follows a suborbital trajectory toward a landing in the Indian Ocean. The flight plan largely mirrors Flight 12, though the booster will run a more aggressive ascent burn after max Q this time, and the ship’s heat shield includes load sensing tiles meant to measure stress at the higher dynamic pressure SpaceX is targeting.

If Friday’s attempt succeeds, Flight 13 could be the last suborbital test in the program. SpaceX is already looking to push for an orbital flight on Flight 14.

Continue Reading