A single hospital generates 50 petabytes of data a year.
Printed, the stack reaches the moon and back, twice. Almost none of it is used.
The NHS spends £8 billion a year on medical equipment and consumables (NAO, 2024). Across every study from 2014 to 2025, 8 to 20% of surgical supply cost per case is opened and never used. The most common reason: anticipating what the surgeon might need.
That number already lives in your systems. Your theatre system saw it. Your preference cards carry it. Your procurement records know it. None of them connect.
That is not a problem. That is a goldmine with a locked door.
Lord Carter said it in 2016: most hospitals do not know what they buy, how much they buy, or what they pay. Not because the data does not exist. Because it has never been given a shared model of itself.
That model is an ontology. A jigsaw scattered across four boxes with no picture on the lid. The ontology is the picture on the lid. It adds no new data. It shows how everything you already have fits together.
The proof: when one hospital reconciled its preference card data, colorectal surgery waste fell 55% (JAMA Surgery, 2025). No new suppliers. No renegotiated prices. Just the data, connected.
Three spots. No IT project. A CSV is enough. One week later: your supply chain ontology and a named map of where your surgical spend leaks, by surgeon, by procedure, by item.
No fee.
If you run theatres, message me.
Right, the floor handles that. It's the level above that's blind.
The same item shows up in procurement, finance, the preference cards, analytics, the substitute list: five separate systems, each holding one slice, none sharing a master view. Ask where the money's leaking and you get four partial answers that don't line up.
The hospital can't see across itself. That's not a staff failing, it's that nothing connects the pieces.
Genuine question, not a gotcha: have you ever seen an item-level report of what was opened in theatre but never used?
I haven't found a trust that produces one. Procurement sees what's bought. Theatres see what's scheduled. Sterile services see what comes back. Nobody sees the gap between them (which is exactly where the waste lives).
That's all Carter meant. Not politics: the data to even answer your objection doesn't exist in any NHS system today.
Just finished to refine this use case for a platform I'm building for #hospital#supplychain.
Fun fact: you have no clue how hard is to roll this out to hospitals without the right #ontology background. It's almost an utopia for a non Tier-1 team.
@DanniMP2018@annvandersteel@Michael_Yon I've built a platform that sits on top of your hospital data to predict disruptions. If you provide us your inventory data we can give you a free audit.
@TapariaSima has been saying it for years: you can't swipe your way to love.
an AI that learns your patterns first, then introduces you to ONE person.
the matchmaker model, just scalable.
why is this controversial?
@vamshi_builds@saluiux That’s exactly the issue though: if a design “doesn’t perform as expected in production”, then it wasn’t a design, it was visual art. Design is the act of solving within production constraints, not before them.
@saluiux@vamshi_builds I’m confused by this distinction. Design and production aren’t separate outcomes: good design is constrained by what ships. Otherwise it’s just visual exploration.
@saxyjacky all good all good, here :
Frontend: React + TypeScript + Vite + Tailwind CSS
Backend: Supabase
AI: ElevenLabs, Google Gemini
3D: Three.js + React Three Fiber