Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:I agree, 100% (Score 1) 455

by dywolf (#47969627) Attached to: Bioethicist At National Institutes of Health: "Why I Hope To Die At 75"

you're talking about anarchy.
it doesn't work too well.
it's been fairly well discredited by history.

it's why society has coalesced into civilizations, such as the one you're living in now, which coincidentally has quite a lot of individual liberty.
in fact, the primary negatives revolve around imposing your will on others.

ah, but you're one of those who never took a basic civics class and never learned the basics of civilization, or why and how we've gone beyond simple might makes right anarchy and feudalism.

Comment: Re:The WHO (Score 1) 455

by dywolf (#47969555) Attached to: Bioethicist At National Institutes of Health: "Why I Hope To Die At 75"

JFC. Did I say the words "ready to die" ?? you insist on misquoting to make your points, intentionally noncomprehending...that or you're just stupid. the number of 80 and 90 year olds who are enjoying a healthy life rather than slowly crumbling under the weight of age is so seriously one sided you only further prove your ignorance.

the medical community, made of medical professionals have the highest rate of living will and end of life planning of any statistical group. its because they see this crap every day. they see the vast overwhelming numbers of people who DONT make these decisions beforehand, who DONT make any sort of plans, who dont think about what is coming. End of life care and planning is seriously lacking in most of hte world, and hte US especially. we dont like to think about it. we put it off.

Medical professionals dont avoid that thinking, that planning (as much), because they see what its effects are.
hell, they're fucking doctors, so they know exactly what they have to look forward to. Constant unfathomable pain from cancer. The slow undignified loss of the ability to control your own body. The loss of mind that patients suffer from and aren't even aware of themselves, but can see from the looks on the faces of their loved ones that something is wrong.

Yes, a blessed few avoid all that and simply go in their sleep.
That kind of end doesn't require any planning.
Almost everyone, if given the choice, would prefer to go that way.
But simply because there's a chance you may go that way, doesn't mean you shouldn't think about what you want to do in case of the alternative.

This is what realistic thinking on this looks like:

Do you want chemo and three months of life, or six weeks of life without the nausea and vomiting that the chemo causes?

Do you want high-risk open-heart surgery, with a fifteen-per-cent risk of dying during the operation, or would you rather continue as you are, with a fifty-per-cent chance you will be dead in two years?

Do you want a prostatectomy, which has a five-per-cent chance of impotence and incontinence, or radiation, with a three-per-cent chance of leaving a hole in your rectum, or would you rather “watch and wait,” with the chance that your cancer will never grow at all?

( http://theincidentaleconomist.... )

some people think (for various reasons, usually religious) that they have to hold on to the very end. no matter how bad it gets, no matter how much it costs (and remember friend: in this country your family has to pick up that tab, since we refuse to create a national system), no matter the suffering you or your family goes through. now if thats what you want, and youve thought it through and your family is on board (and it helps if you're rich), then power to you.

But at some point youre going to face those kind of decisions.
I just hope you show a higher intellectual ability by then than you are here.

Just remember: if we can show our pets the compassion to not force them to endure a living nightmare of misery, then surely we can show the same compassion to each other, to respect each others wishes. The only thing that's certain in life is death, and it's one of the most personal decisions you can make for yourself.

Comment: Re:Pretty Much Sums it Up (Score 1) 734

by dywolf (#47969345) Attached to: How Our Botched Understanding of "Science" Ruins Everything

yes its a straw man. that should be obvious. but that doesn't change the point: it's a stand in for every random wanker who thinks his pet opinion or position or whatever deserves to be given equal weight, equal time, or equal consideration as actual scientific experts on a subject.

and no, it wouldn't actually be worth something if it actually was my opinion, because its wrong.
as a testable, provable statement, any opinion concerning it after its already been falsified, barring the discovery of any additional data, is a worthless opinion.

no, not all opinions are worth something.
and thats the point.

Comment: Re:I agree, 100% (Score 2) 455

by dywolf (#47967345) Attached to: Bioethicist At National Institutes of Health: "Why I Hope To Die At 75"

No. that is not what he said.
What he said was specifically about him and HIS plans and viewpoint.

He did not call for these same things to applied to any one else.
He did not call for people to be terminated at birth.

You are attributing a lot of FALSE statements to him.
You are not insightful.
You are a troll.

Comment: Re:The WHO (Score 2) 455

by dywolf (#47967315) Attached to: Bioethicist At National Institutes of Health: "Why I Hope To Die At 75"

a lot of medical professionals carry this opinion, or a similar one, precisely because they see, every day, what the reality is of old age.
and they dont change their minds; rather they are one of the largest grous with settled views on it who already know what they want and how they want to go.

Comment: Re:Pretty Much Sums it Up (Score 1) 734

by dywolf (#47965143) Attached to: How Our Botched Understanding of "Science" Ruins Everything

All opinions are worth something?

My opinion is 2+2=5.
Oh right.
2+2 isnt 5.

So maybe there is something the concept of "listening to people who know what they are talking about" after all.
Rather than giving any crank and random bum off the street equal time and assuming equal credibility.

Comment: Re:you end up with "established science" (Score 1) 734

by dywolf (#47965025) Attached to: How Our Botched Understanding of "Science" Ruins Everything

absolutely no part of it requries giving up all your money or your standard of living, nor does it acll for forcing third world countries to wallow in filth.
its not because you disagree that you are ignorant.
its because of hte ignorant and moronic things you say that you are ignorant.

Comment: Re:Non Tax Based?!? (Score 1) 88

by dywolf (#47963697) Attached to: Is Google's Non-Tax Based Public School Funding Cause For Celebration?

it's purely a PR move.

teachers, nay anyone, cannot rely on the beneficent feelings of mega corps or rich donors.

1) most of them wont get the funding they need. which is why we have taxes to ensure that those things get funded that need it (in theory...idiots who think teachers SHOULD be funded by bake sales not withstanding)

2) those who do will feel a lot of pressure to...adjust...their curriculum to continue recieving the funding. And as Chief Justice Roberts recently stated, that's "not corruption". /sarcasm

"The four building blocks of the universe are fire, water, gravel and vinyl." -- Dave Barry