What every reader here should know.

mgdavid

speedyrite wrote: »

......And a view unrelated to my financial planning in retirement.

Now that bit I find completely illogical!
And that is my point of view.

dunroving

Science is still more obsessed with quantity of life and less with quality. Medical advances sometimes keep our bodies going past the point where it's morally justifiable to do so.

Malthusian

dunroving wrote: »

Science is still more obsessed with quantity of life and less with quality.

In the same way as the lumberjacking industry is obsessed with chopping down trees and not with the quality of the furniture they're made into. Because they're lumberjacks, not carpenters, and it's not their job. Science is able to make medicine that extends our life, but it can't make medicine that makes people happy. Science's job is to extend your life, it's your job to fill it.

Chickereeeee

Well, I have not died yet, so, based on my experience, I am not going to.

Just a minute, what is that tiny writing?

"Please remember that past performance is not a reliable indicator of future performance"

Darn

C

bigadaj

dunroving wrote: »

Science is still more obsessed with quantity of life and less with quality. Medical advances sometimes keep our bodies going past the point where it's morally justifiable to do so.

Yes, well that's the abrogation of moral responsibility primarily from politicians and lawyers/ judges.

It is a particularly perverse situation where very elderly people, with no wish to live, have their life extended by medical practices that didn't exist decades ago.

We've had people with terrible injuries or diseases fail to gain the right to die, and sometimes people's having to cross halfway across Europe to do what they want.

Meanwhile millions are spent on these medical practices whilst there is a crisis in NHS funding, it's all quite mad.

dunroving

Malthusian wrote: »

In the same way as the lumberjacking industry is obsessed with chopping down trees and not with the quality of the furniture they're made into. Because they're lumberjacks, not carpenters, and it's not their job. Science is able to make medicine that extends our life, but it can't make medicine that makes people happy. Science's job is to extend your life, it's your job to fill it.

Quality of life isn't just happiness. It's as much the potential subject of science as life expectancy. Re: your last comment "Science's job is to extend your life", not sure I'd agree that's always the case; see below.

Think about painkillers, for example - they don't extend life, but they do improve quality of life. Imagine if an A&E department didn't have them.

bigadaj wrote: »

Yes, well that's the abrogation of moral responsibility primarily from politicians and lawyers/ judges.

It is a particularly perverse situation where very elderly people, with no wish to live, have their life extended by medical practices that didn't exist decades ago.

We've had people with terrible injuries or diseases fail to gain the right to die, and sometimes people's having to cross halfway across Europe to do what they want.

Meanwhile millions are spent on these medical practices whilst there is a crisis in NHS funding, it's all quite mad.

Glad someone got my point. I'd also suggest though that the Western medical model looks at death as "failure", so there is a medical ethics issue there, not just a political issue.