Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
coberst

Major Moral Dilemma: It Started with ******

4 posts in this topic

Major Moral Dilemma: It Started with ******

It is obvious even to the most casual observer (no Critical Thinking required) that we must quickly deal with the problem that medical technology has left on our door step. As a result of the success of medical technology we can prolong life ever more, every day, than the day before. I claim that this constantly extending the prolongation of life must quickly cease; we can no longer afford such a foolish unreflective behavior.

Bruce Hardy, a British citizen and cancer victim, was refused the funds, by British health officials, for a drug that could likely prolong his life for 6 more months. The drug treatment cost was estimated to be $54,000. His distraught wife said “Everybody should be allowed to have as much life as they can”.

“British authorities, after a storm of protest, are reconsidering their decision on the cancer drug and others.”

The introduction of the drug ******, by Pfizer, in 1998, panicked British health officials. They figured it might bankrupt the government’s health budget and thus placed restrictions on its use. Pfizer sued and the British government instituted a standard program, with the acronym NICE, for rationing health drugs.

“Before NICE, hospitals and clinics often came to different decisions about which drugs to buy, creating geographic disparities in care that led to outrage.”

“British Balance Benefit vs. Cost of Latest Drugs” New York Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/03/health/0...amp;_r=1&hp

I have stated many times before that I was convinced that we have created a technology that is too powerful for our intellectually unsophisticated citizens to deal with. It seems to me that this particular dilemma does not require a great deal of sophistication to understand. This might be a perfect place to begin a nationwide (USA) Internet discourse directed at getting our intellectual arms around this problem and helping our government officials in an attempt to resolve this terrible dilemma.

Incidentally I am 74 years old, which I think qualifies me to push this matter without appearing to be a hypocrite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

My post is not to provide answers but to engage the consciousness of the reader to the basic problem. Mine is not so much a question as it is a claim that we face some very serious moral questions that requires answers constructed on a foundation of courage, compassion, and sophistication. How can we stabilize world human population in a moral and sophisticated manner and how do we utilize our resources to best affect that important result?

Citizens must be sophisticated enough to recognize the problem or they will never allow an answer to be formulated. Most of our problems cannot be solved because our citizens are not sophisticated enough to recognize them and thus will not permit a solution until they face the abyss. Often when the abyss is here the solution is too late.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have stated many times before that I was convinced that we have created a technology that is too powerful for our intellectually unsophisticated citizens to deal with. It seems to me that this particular dilemma does not require a great deal of sophistication to understand. This might be a perfect place to begin a nationwide (USA) Internet discourse directed at getting our intellectual arms around this problem and helping our government officials in an attempt to resolve this terrible dilemma.

Intellectual sophistication is no basis on which to decide who deserves what length of life, this decision is personal for the individual. Of course economic realities may prevent such treatments from becoming widespread, but that is a matter for governments to assign resources as they see themselves able.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Intellectual sophistication is no basis on which to decide who deserves what length of life, this decision is personal for the individual. Of course economic realities may prevent such treatments from becoming widespread, but that is a matter for governments to assign resources as they see themselves able.

Intellectual sophistication is a good foundation for judging complex issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.