On May 6, 2011, at 12:55 AM, Somebody Somebody wrote:
> I'm not impressed by your making fun of the idea of extending the duration of healthy lifespan. In that, you're in good company. Many good religious people consider it unspeakable that mankind should play God and seek to improve its genetic destiny. It makes me sad that the few people who are forward thinking enough to reject this point of view are disproportionately of the libertarian inclination. The left should be stalwartly on the side of improving the human condition. It used to be.
If the NIH and the EPA worked together to find causes and cures for the typical 'western' health issues I'd be on your side in this argument. Instead, we let the insurance, pharmaceutical and medical industries extend life with palliatives and surgical interventions. And the quality of that life is arguably less than an improvement on the 'human condition', while it has improved the wealth and power of those industries. As a beneficiary of this system I am pleased to be here to offer this contribution, but still, I'd argue for a different strategy toward improving health.