News
Tesla Model 3-based ventilator critiqued by ICU nurse: “Very good job…well done.”
An Anaesthetics and Intensive Care Unit (ICU) nurse recently broke down Tesla’s video of its in-house ventilator system that is made from Model 3 parts.
YouTuber Chris Vanderstock is a nurse by trade and holds over 20 years of experience in a medical setting. His resume includes years of administering patients with real-life medical conditions anesthesia before surgeries and providing them with air via the operation of a manual resuscitator. Vanderstock has plenty of experience with critical care ventilators and how they operate making him a prime candidate to give Tesla’s engineering team relevant feedback toward its newly designed machine.
Vanderstock was initially impressed with Tesla’s utilization of its vehicle parts to create an efficient ventilator. “I reckon a good two-thirds of this ventilator is from existing parts that Tesla already has,” the veteran nurse said. After listing the parts that will be included in the ventilator, like the Model 3’s display, Vanderstock gave his kudos to the Tesla team. Tesla’s goal was to use primarily parts that it knew for reliability purposes, as well as not take away any parts from the medical community who are already struggling with providing hospitals with ventilators, to begin with.
The mixing chamber that is responsible for combining several gases to create breathable air for a patient who is having trouble breathing is a critical part of a ventilator. Along with the mixing chamber, several pressure monitors, along with volume sensors that will provide the patient with the correct levels of oxygen, are included in the Tesla ventilator. Vanderstock noted that this is one of the most crucial parts of a ventilator, as too much air into the lungs can overinflate them, causing more damage than there was initially. Tesla nailed this, according to Vanderstock. “Kudos to these guys.”
Perhaps one of the most exciting portions of the Tesla-made ventilator is the use of two filters, one on the patient end where air is distributed to a patient’s lungs, and one on the machine end, where the virus will be displaced as the patient exhales. This double-filter feature is a notable part of ventilators from Medtronic, a company that Tesla has been in talks with since late March. Vanderstock says the ventilator’s machine-end filter is crucial to keeping healthcare workers safe, as a non-filtered machine end could lead to the virus being spread to those in the room.
The only concern Vanderstock had about the ventilator was how Tesla planned to warm and humidify the oxygen that will go to a patient’s lungs. “When you are thinking about how we breathe, our nose, the turbinates, the structures behind your mouth, going down your trachea into your lungs, are all being warmed…by your blood supply. As air travels down, it gets warmed on the way, and obviously, you’ve got the mucosal layers that’s sending in a bit of moisture as well,” he remarked.
One of Vanderstock’s favorite features is the inclusion of the Model 3 dash screen that will display information like pressure and oxygen concentration to medical professionals. “The innovative infotainment system could potentially help patients. Very good job at Tesla, well done,” he said.
All in all, Vanderstock is exceptionally impressed with Tesla’s ability to create a ventilator that has such an effective manner in a short amount of time. “Nonetheless, great first effort,” he said.
While the machine will still have to pass through Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations, he believes this process could be expedited as ventilators are needed on the front lines of hospitals in some of the United States’ most prominent cities.
CEO Elon Musk has stated that ventilators, whether they are purchased or manufactured by Tesla, will be available for free with worldwide shipping as long as the hospital requesting the machines is in immediate need of them. Musk has already made over 1,200 donations to Los Angeles and New York City hospitals as the COVID-19 pandemic is expected to reach its peak this week, according to U.S. Surgeon General Jerome Adams.
Watch Chris Vanderstock’s breakdown of the Tesla Ventilator below.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.
The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.
The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”
Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Napoli said:
“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.
As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.
We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.
My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.
I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.
Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.
Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
