64 replies to this topic

[qpp]

Umm, isn't this just a very concrete example of survival bias in action? Plenty of rich people dying young, plenty of intelligent people dying young - 10+ people of business or political successes is no basis for expecting them to have a shared fountain of youth.

[xEva]

Re North Koreans, they may look young, as a group, 'cause they don't live long enough. The first hit google gives for their life expectancy is "Male 67.0, female 74.0". 

 

Returning to the topic, surely money correlates with success, correlates with good genes, correlates with health span. More importantly, it correlates with being able to take a better care of oneself when it matters most,  which is old age. I forget who on this forum said long time ago that money is the determining factor in one's lifespan (certainly healthspan).  ..well, money alone may not suffice, but without it, everything else quickly becomes irrelevant.   

[aconita]

How money correlates to good genes is something I have got some difficult to grasp...

 

Success....I know more than a couple of loosers whom are rich but certainly not because they are successful or will ever be....

 

Health span...I am not so sure about that either but in country where you need to pay in order to get medical attentions or cures it is likely that money may help.

 

well, money alone may not suffice, but without it, everything else quickly becomes irrelevant.

 

I totally agree: when one is about to die because of cancer being rich must be of great relief...while in the other hand to be healthy, happy and fulfilled but not rich must be pure cruelty.

 

 

[xEva]

you guys in Europe are so spoiled and take so much for granted! Here is the States, if you're over 50 (not mentioning older) and you have not made enough $$ --and it could be, cause, having helluva good genes, you kept on playing, just like Grasshopper from the Aesop's fable-- and then wham! winter's here.  Suddenly you find out that you can't afford even basic medical care, not to mention a dentist, and some can barely pay rent! This is is the age when these things become relevant. Longevity? The struggle shifts to keeping a roof over your head. This country favors the Ant -- but even the hardworking Ant is not spared, as Grasshoppers like to point out. Should Ant get sick (blame unlucky genes coupled with overwork) chances are, he will lose everything he worked so hard his entire life for! (medical expenses is the leading cause of bankruptcy here)

 

Money and good genes decide absolutely everything, because a basic medical care is not a right but a privilege one must earn (just ask niner if you don't believe me). Lucky genes can carry you through the summer and fall, but in the wintertime it's money that matters. Money and nothing else will decide whether you  live or die. And that's exactly how it should be!

Edited by xEva, 12 May 2017 - 03:51 PM.

[pamojja]

Money and nothing else will decide whether you  live or die. And that's exactly how it should be!

 

I think once one looses good health one realizes that it can't be bought. What is the success of standard of care for the most likely premature deaths, CVD or cancer? About 1% decrease in 5-year mortality for the first, and in average 3% for the second. Yes, thereby some figures really get rich. But patients die nevertheless even with unlimited resources. Think about all the billionaires dying of CVD or cancer.

 

Can't follow how such profit-making with the dying is how it exactly should be..

[sthira]

Yep, the billionaires die on schedule just like everyone else. Maybe they go down in more luxury and less pain, but down they fall anyway. What amazes me (among many things) about the very wealthy is that rather than contribute to the longevity science that could have saved their lives, they'd rather just hold onto their billions and die.

Isn't that amazing?

Rather than give to the grassroots organizations that are so strapped for cash, that could potentially more quickly advance solutions to the diseases of aging, the billionaire class chooses to suffer and die just like everyone else.

Slowly this may be changing -- but in the meantime just pause to consider the tragic waste.

Money and good genes decide absolutely everything, because a basic medical care is not a right but a privilege one must earn (just ask niner if you don't believe me). Lucky genes can carry you through the summer and fall, but in the wintertime it's money that matters. Money and nothing else will decide whether you live or die. And that's exactly how it should be!

This is clearly an oversimplification, and also rather heartless (unless I've misunderstood the meaning behind your words).

What happened to niner?

Edited by sthira, 12 May 2017 - 05:04 PM.

[aconita]

Money and nothing else will decide whether you  live or die. And that's exactly how it should be!

 

I agree; the poor should be all put down before they can reproduce, whom isn't rich doesn't deserve to live and value of a man should be measured according to his bank account!

 

It is a real relief to see someone whom finally got it right....

[xEva]

lol aconita 

 

@sthira: Nothing happened to niner. Aside from being highly respected  (some may even say, loved) member of this forum, he is the foremost advocate of the idea that access to basic healthcare is not a right but a privilege (or just a service that must be bought)..  

 

and yeah, there is a bit of sarcasm in my post, though I don't see oversimplification. That's the harsh reality. You say money can't buy health once it's gone? True, but try keeping it, if you can't afford to see a doctor or buy medicine, which is the reality for millions in this richest country on the planet. But wait, it gets better! Here you're also prevented from being able to treat yourself, simply because it's against the law to be in possession of a prescription drug without having a valid prescription. Yeah, all the Americans here experimenting with dasatinib or rapamycin are breaking the law. 

 

But the main point of my post was that working hard and doing all the right things is not enough to save you from bankruptcy and thus from not being able to afford the life-extension niceties, when they become available. To really survive a serious illness in the US you need to keep on hand an extra couple of million bucks (all those people who had to declare bankruptcy after surviving a serious illness were indeed properly insured). This means that you simply have to make a decent amount of money and screw everything else. Life extension for all? Don't be naive. We don't even have a basic healthcare for all. 

Edited by xEva, 12 May 2017 - 10:19 PM.

[aconita]

the idea that access to basic healthcare is not a right but a privilege

 

Maybe a privilege brought by civilization, where taxes from everybody ensure the privilege to medical care to everybody, even to whom can't afford it.

 

Yes, it seems that unluckily the privilege to live in a civilized society isn't for everybody yet, regardless from the richness of its citizens...    

 

Just to remind that civilization is measured by the right to live decently for everybody, not only for the stronger or the wealthier and not by how expensive are the cars citizens are driving.

[Forever21]

We're talking as if healthcare is one thing.

 

I think basic healthcare (checkups, tummy aches, a quick check with the doc on what's wrong) should be a right. Free, basic, very basic health care.

 

As for proper healthcare, like a more specific, advanced, next stage check, from eyes, surgery, chiro, these should be market-based.

 

As for longevity and unlimited lifespan, I think it should only be available for billionaires.

[aconita]

Sure, health care everybody can afford to pay anyway should be free while what is so expensive only rich people can afford should be market-based (in other words you have to pay for it).

 

You really got it all, that's exactly what public health care is about!

 

If health shouldn't be everybody's right why should be your right to have laws stopping me to come over to beat the shit out of you, take all your money, your goods, your house, your woman, your car, your dog...and if I really feel nasty your golden fish too?

 

Maybe because those things are more valuable than health, as somebody else suggested above?

 

As for longevity and unlimited lifespan, I think it should only be available for billionaires.

 

Whoooops....I didn't realize to be on a "billionaires only" forum, my apologies!  

[xEva]

If health shouldn't be everybody's right why should be your right to have laws stopping me to come over to beat the shit out of you, take all your money, your goods, your house, your woman, your car, your dog...and if I really feel nasty your golden fish too?

 

you're so unamerican, it's pathetic!    That's where my constitutional right to bear arms comes in. 

[Forever21]

What does the US constitution say about Universal Healthcare? 

[xEva]

the US constitution does not mention the word Health. It only assures unalienable rights to Liberty, Dignity and the pursuit of Happiness. 

 

Regarding the latter, one of the famous Schopenhauer quotes states, "Nine-tenth of our happiness depends on health alone." => the pursuit of only 0.1 of happiness is guaranteed by the American Constitution.

 

As for the other 9/10, the existing laws explicitly prohibit the pursuit of health without the intermediacy of a licensed health professional. So, on your own, you have only the access to OTC drugs, vit+supplements, herbs  and spices. All the modern drugs, med. devices and procedures are explicitly off limits. Getting your hands on them, without the approval or sanction by a licensed health professional, is punishable by a multitude of existing laws, both on federal and state level. 

 

Yeah, American Med Association is a powerful professional guild that takes good care of its members AMA has always been the most prominent and influential opponent to this godawful, shameful, socialist, commie and utterly un-American idea of the universal healthcare.  

 

Edited by xEva, 13 May 2017 - 03:37 AM.

[aconita]

That's where my constitutional right to bear arms comes in

 

No, that's where institutions comes in.

 

You seem to have a quite naive perception about how to solve issues.

 

Bear arms in order to guarantee the possession of your belongings, unrestricted access to drugs in order to guarantee your health, six digits bank account in order to guarantee your right to survive....

 

What about if I get a gun bigger than yours or if you need medical attentions beyond gobbling on some dasatinib in the experimental attempt to live a few years longer or your bank goes broken?

 

Do you really think to be able to defend yourself always and from everybody?

 

What about when you'll be a frail elderly?

 

Well, don't worry, if you are convinced to be able to provide by yourself for your health just by unrestricted access to drugs your chances to get elderly are quite slim anyway, problem solved.
 

[sthira]

The problem isn't access to "...the modern drugs, med. devices and procedures [which are] are explicitly off limits..". The problem is even with open and free access none of these appear to work very well to extend lifespan.

Nor is the problem that AMA is "...the most prominent and influential opponent to this godawful, shameful, socialist, commie and utterly un-American idea of the universal healthcare." The problem is even with the very best of our current state of medical advancements none of them appear to work very well anyway (if our goal is extended lifespan).

No matter what we do or what modern medicine is currently able to provide us or not, we shall grow old and feeble and demented and struck down by diseases of aging anyway. That's a technological problem.

Sure, politics and regulations are preventing some progress -- they're prohibitively expensive, time consuming, and seemingly arbitrary. But FDA is in place for a reason. And the reason is most stuff doesn't work very well to solve the problem we want solved (life extension).

So as a thought experiment, let's say my magic wand throws open the sparkle doors to any of "...the modern drugs, med. devices and procedures [which are] are explicitly off limits.." and gives you instant access. Now what. Think you'd achieve a longer, healthier life?

The problem is biology is hard, bodies are uber complicated, funding to study what's hard and likely to result in medical failure is short, researchers tend to stick with what's easy and likely publishable, and no one (other than SENS to my awareness and its growing branches) will study what is hard because most efforts will fail anyway.

The problem is money -- not money for access to what already exists -- money to advance what doesn't exist yet. And the problem is failure -- if no one is allowed to fail because failure won't result in another grant, then no one shall pursue what's hard.

Universal healthcare is a separate issue; I agree with you that it's a fucking absolute tragedy that in the "richest country in the world" a person who's suddenly stricken with cancer must now choose between bankruptcy and procedures which ultimately will fail anyway (fail to extend lifespan).

[pamojja]

I agree with you that it's a fucking absolute tragedy that in the "richest country in the world" a person who's suddenly stricken with cancer must now choose between bankruptcy and procedures which ultimately will fail anyway (fail to extend lifespan).

 

Though all non-US citizens must concede that this American way of distributing wealth from the bottom of society to the upper percents almost at gun-point is the most efficient. Our European 'socialist' governments do the same much less transparently.

[sthira]

I agree with you that it's a fucking absolute tragedy that in the "richest country in the world" a person who's suddenly stricken with cancer must now choose between bankruptcy and procedures which ultimately will fail anyway (fail to extend lifespan).

Though all non-US citizens must concede that this American way of distributing wealth from the bottom of society to the upper percents almost at gun-point is the most efficient. Our European 'socialist' governments do the same much less transparently.

I'm confused by what you mean by the words bottom and top. Are you saying bottom means the marketplace and top means government funded healthcare?

Also, the US already has publically funded healthcare. It's just the most inefficient and wasteful process ever. When a person racks up hundreds of thousands in healthcare costs, then they go bankrupt, it's the taxpayers who are burdened. So we need to shift. Eventually we will. We just have to suffer very bad times for longer now, given what we've done politically.

[pamojja]

 

Though all non-US citizens must concede that this American way of distributing wealth from the bottom of society to the upper percents almost at gun-point is the most efficient. Our European 'socialist' governments do the same much less transparently.

I'm confused by what you mean by the words bottom and top. Are you saying bottom means the marketplace and top means government funded healthcare?

 

Bottom means the individuals making a living from working, top means shareholders, for example in the pharmaceutical industry.

 

 

In 2011, global spending on prescription drugs topped $954 billion, even as growth slowed somewhat in Europe and North America. The United States accounts for more than a third of the global pharmaceutical market, with $340 billion in annual sales followed by the EU and Japan.^[90] Emerging markets such as China, Russia, South Korea and Mexico outpaced that market, growing a huge 81 percent.^[91][92]

 

^{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_inequality_in_the_United_States}

 

^{..the media reported, the "richest 1 percent in the United States now own more additional income than the bottom 90 percent".[6]}

 

 

 

[xEva]

@sthira: as a SENS advocate, you insist that the problem of aging should be solved first and foremost, for which no money should be spared. But given the current state of affairs, why would I want to contribute to a goal that will benefit only a select few who, by all accounts, already live longer and far better than an average joe? Isn't it disingenuous to appeal to the masses to support SENS research knowing damn well that it's very unlikely that they will be able to afford its fruits? Worse yet, given the current state of affairs, the aforementioned masses will likely be prosecuted for getting their hands on these fruits outside of the strictly regulated system which is only getting more and more oppressive. 

 

I'll tell you what. The way things are going, it's not difficult to predict how it will all unfold. The problem of aging will certainly be solved -- even sooner than we now imagine --  but the functional immortality will be available only to the select few who could afford it -- and maybe rightly so! The history of humanity will nicely make a full circle: we started with the myths about immortal gods and we will end up with the emergence of a functionally immortal elite (living on their well guarded "isles of the blessed" ). Just like in the myths, a mortal will have a chance to join the gods and become immortal -- by striking it rich, of course! -- which should not be looked down upon! Why, it is only fair, since, ultimately, the riches are bestowed by the masses, who are made happy to purchase.. whatever makes them happy. And on the surface this is very democratic! Everybody has a chance, anyone in theory can do it. That very few in fact can is actually a huge bonus.  

 

As for the aging masses, the access to health will be even more regulated than it is now. Already existing laws that limit access will be strictly enforced. The management of "human resources" will acquire an entirely new meaning. 

Edited by xEva, 13 May 2017 - 01:45 PM.

[sthira]

@sthira: as a SENS advocate, you insist that the problem of aging should be solved first and foremost, for which no money should be spared.

But given the current state of affairs, why would I want to contribute to a goal that will benefit only a select few who, by all accounts, already live longer and far better than an average joe? Isn't it disingenuous to appeal to the masses to support SENS research knowing damn well that it's very unlikely that they will be able to afford its fruits? Worse yet, given the current state of affairs, the aforementioned masses will likely be prosecuted for getting their hands on these fruits outside of the strictly regulated system which is only getting more and more oppressive.

xEva, I'm happy to see you posting again! I've learned so much from your prior writing. We also have a lot of fasting experience and admiration in common -- your expertise here has been invaluable to me, and many many others. And perhaps similar to you I see fasting and CR(ON) as our best and only current ways of "slowing" the aging process. Until SENS or Calico or LEF or whatever AGI advance or Zuckerbergian contribution of "99% of their FB profits devoted to curing all human diseases" until something comes to fruition, fasting and CR are about all we have to slow inevitable aging.

And I think you already know as well as anyone that you'll indeed benefit from medical progress whether you like it or not. It's gonna happen, as you say, and sure, maybe most of the progress will initially extend LS for the wealthy; but everything is changing all the time, and it'll change again and again. You already know the argument that the raising waters of techie progress shall lift all -- even those in the Third World. It's doing that now, and there's no reason for it to suddenly stop. Blah blah blah, of course at first it'll only be for the wealthy, but then health benefits shall also extend to everyone else. This is how the world works, it's why our streets are filled with car traffic instead of horse and buggy traffic blah blah blah... Why are you using a laptop or iPhone? Those were initially only for the wealthy, too, until times changed again.

I'll tell you what. The way things are going, it's not difficult to predict how it will all unfold. The problem of aging will certainly be solved -- even sooner than we now imagine -- but the functional immortality will be available only to the select few who could afford it -- and maybe rightly so! The history of humanity will nicely make a full circle: we started with the myths about immortal gods and we will end up with the emergence of a functionally immortal elite (living on their well guarded "isles of the blessed" ). Just like in the myths, a mortal will have a chance to join the gods and become immortal -- by striking it rich, of course! -- which should not be looked down upon! Why, it is only fair, since, ultimately, the riches are bestowed by the masses, who are made happy to purchase.. whatever makes them happy. And on the surface this is very democratic! Everybody has a chance, anyone in theory can do it. That very few in fact can is actually a huge bonus.

As for the aging masses, the access to health will be even more regulated than it is now. Already existing laws that limit access will be strictly enforced. The management of "human resources" will acquire an entirely new meaning.

Well, I see it unfolding much differently than this, of course. And to me the major future player in all areas of our lives will be non-human AGI. The rise of AGI and demotion of the human species from smartest being to second smartest being shall change everything about everything. The human species as we know it today I don't think will even exist for too many more generations. We'll morphing into beings that are increasingly machine-enhanced and durable for exploration into near infinite cosmos.

The sooner the better, as far as I'm concerned.

[orion602]

 The problem of aging will certainly be solved -- even sooner than we now imagine --  but the functional immortality will be available only to the select few who could afford it -- and maybe rightly so! The history of humanity will nicely make a full circle: we started with the myths about immortal gods and we will end up with the emergence of a functionally immortal elite (living on their well guarded "isles of the blessed" ). Just like in the myths, a mortal will have a chance to join the gods and become immortal -- by striking it rich, of course! . 

 

it depends on how sophisticated the treatment would be. if it was just mixture of few substances with easy manufacturing process needed for say doubling lifespan,  elite would not be able to keep it just for selected few. but  true, its very unlikely there will be such easily achievable drugs.

 

[xEva]

 blah blah blah...

...

 

Well, I see it unfolding much differently than this, of course. And to me the major future player in all areas of our lives will be non-human AGI. The rise of AGI and demotion of the human species from smartest being to second smartest being shall change everything about everything. The human species as we know it today I don't think will even exist for too many more generations. We'll morphing into beings that are increasingly machine-enhanced and durable for exploration into near infinite cosmos.

The sooner the better, as far as I'm concerned.

 

 

 

If we're morphing  into "increasingly machine-enhanced durable beings", why bother solving a purely biological problem of aging? Why not step over it and go straight to the 'merging with the machines' phase?

 

Don't get me wrong, I like scifi, even though, as an ex-"IT professional" I do not share your enthusiasm for an AGI, which, you hope, will come and solve all our problems  (garbage in garbage out). I'm pretty sure though about my somewhat dystopian vision of the future. The prerequisite conditions are already in place (precedents, cultural expectations, even legislation). And even from the point of view of a composition, that's how the history of humanity should progress (you know, the finale should echo earlier developments like, for example, in Chopin's Fantaisie Impromptu -- nice!)

 

In fact, I'm starting to think that's how things have always been. We have already merged with technology. Many times over. It's easy to see, once you realize that that there is no chance in hell that life has emerged as a result of some random fluctuations. The more I study biology the less doubts remain that life was created -- quite a development for a born and raised atheist, no? From this it's not difficult to imagine that perhaps the rest of the world was created too, as the necessary prerequisite stage for life. And if so, then we do live in a simulation, no?  

 

More than that, recently we have created a simulation of our own, though it is still young. It is the Internet, of course. It is a brand new world, with its own space and its own 'physical laws'. It is already populated with life-like, though still primitive, entities. Wait till it grows, imagine how enormous it will be in just a hundred years! In a thousand? And think about it, from its very conception, it has never been turned off -- you can't turn it off. It is alive -- alive not as a life form, but as a world, as a universe. And it will continue to grow and evolve. And it does not matter that its underlying technology will continue to change and evolve with it.  The underlying principle on which it is based has been in place from its very conception and will remain the same forever. It will continue to act as the principle law that governs its organization. Sorta its main physical law. 

 

And so this world is already alive and, chances are, it will outlive humanity. If not, we, the humans of the future, will download ourselves into it, in our perpetual pursuit of new experiences. Hey we already spend most of our time attached to it! lol (not to mention the games! oh don't get me started).

 

And yeah, why not, one day it will be possible for us to 'upload' ourselves into this world. In the process we will realize, or remember rather, that that's how it had always been:  We create a world, perhaps without realizing it at first. And then we populate it, first with props and virtual beings, then joining in ourselves. Expanding, growing, enhancing. Before you know it, yet another immense, diverse, fascinated world is created -- and discovered in the process of creation. Evolution of life is a passe idea. That's not what life progression is all about. It's about the evolution of worlds that life creates in order for life to continue.

 

ah never mind I got carried away.

Edited by xEva, 13 May 2017 - 09:47 PM.

[sthira]

...like, for example, in Chopin's Fantaisie Impromptu -- nice!

Yeah! Now you're talking sense, sista:

https://youtu.be/yFC8VEFAeos

...we do live in a simulation, no?

Yeah! Now you're talking even more sense!

https://youtu.be/ooYAyko7X-U

More than that, recently we have created a simulation of our own, though it is still young. It is the Internet, of course. It is a brand new world, with its own space and its own 'physical laws'. It is already populated with life-like, though still primitive, entities. Wait till it grows, imagine how enormous it will be in just a hundred years! In a thousand? And think about it, from its very conception, it has never been turned off -- you can't turn it off. It is alive -- alive not as a life form, but as a world, as a universe. And it will continue to grow and evolve. And it does not matter that its underlying technology will continue to change and evolve with it. The underlying principle on which it is based has been in place from its very conception and will remain the same forever. It will continue to act as the principle law that governs its organization. Sorta its main physical law.

And so this world is already alive and, chances are, it will outlive humanity. If not, we, the humans of the future, will download ourselves into it, in our perpetual pursuit of new experiences. Hey we already spend most of our time attached to it! lol (not to mention the games! oh don't get me started).

And yeah, why not, one day it will be possible for us to 'upload' ourselves into this world. In the process we will realize, or remember rather, that that's how it had always been: We create a world, perhaps without realizing it at first. And then we populate it, first with props and virtual beings, then joining in ourselves. Expanding, growing, enhancing. Before you know it, yet another immense, diverse, fascinated world is created -- and discovered in the process of creation. Evolution of life is a passe idea. That's not what life progression is all about. It's about the evolution of worlds that life creates in order for life to continue.

ah never mind I got carried away.

Yes! So Fuck Dystopia! I'm tired of hearing about dramatic, unimaginative and boring as fuck mad max dystopias or whatever. We collectively get what we collectively aim to achieve. Think positive, think big, and pass the word.

[Forever21]

It does sound very religious to believe that this whole universe we live in is "real" and not some kind of simulation.

[xEva]

Yes but we should not discount the ancient myths out of hand, because, funny enough, they too contain clues that point to a simulation. 2 examples below, maybe too brief, out of necessity, but:

 

1. the Christian legend of Lucifer makes sense only if we assume that he was in fact the head of the testing department -- you know, the one in charge of finding bugs in new releases. Otherwise it does not make sense why would almighty God allow this renegade angel torment his favorite creation. See, when software is tested it may look from the outside that the tester has evil intentions --all he wants is to break it, it seems-- while in fact he is looking for bugs to be fixed. Also it's only fitting that the most perfect of angels should be put in charge of testing of the new release of AI. (Just in case you may not know, according to the legend, Lucifer was the height of God's creation, sorta his version of AGI.)

 

2. the Buddhist idea of liberation by overcoming the cycle of rebirths reminds very much an effort to rescue virtual games addicts, hopelessly lost in their game, to the point that they forgot about the life outside. 

 

There is more! I noticed these things long time ago, as already an IT professional, but still not quite a biologist. I saw that many incongruences of various religious myths start making perfect sense once you assume that we live 'in a simulation' (though at the time there were no such concept yet, I just assumed that we lived in an advanced version of the Internet). 

Edited by xEva, 15 May 2017 - 08:51 PM.

[Skyguy2005]

AMA has always been the most prominent and influential opponent to this godawful, shameful, socialist, commie and utterly un-American idea of the universal healthcare.  

 

 

America is like 33rd for life expectancy, compared to South East Asia and Middle East herbs from the Americas are shit, it's almost as if being "un-American" is a *good* thing.

 

In fact, I think it is!!

[pamojja]

 

 utterly un-American idea of the universal healthcare. 

 

 it's almost as if being "un-American" is a *good* thing.

 

In fact, I think it is!!

 

Off course, as soon as one claims a particular world-view with nationalistic pride - one would have utterly gone ashtray. Interestingly, I have more 'un-American' American friends then otherwise. It's just one political view in a country of many, and as such pure propaganda.
 

On the other hand if you claim the opposite a good thing, its too simplistic and gone ashtray as well.

 

True, I cant go bankrupt with standard of care in my country in cases of acute medicine. But with chronic diseases, like CVD or cancer, and not satisfied with the only available and paid-for 1-3% 5-year mortality reduction, I still can go bankrupt like in the states. Universal health care is as un-american as it is un-earthy. It's still utopia.

 

But back to the topic of this thread and the reality we life in. Yes, with so much money in my pocket, which I could never earn through honest manual labor, but only through speculation (where my profits accumulate through the losses of manual laborers rights, exhaustion of limited natural resources, a patentable molecule medicine with no natural options, and so on..), one has a better chance to survive even deathly chronic diseases a bid longer. But still then, most seem to have only the money in an very 'American' way, but not the whereabouts.

Edited by pamojja, 16 May 2017 - 05:49 PM.

[Forever21]

Middle East? Life expectancy 14 years.

 

 

 

AMA has always been the most prominent and influential opponent to this godawful, shameful, socialist, commie and utterly un-American idea of the universal healthcare.  

 

 

America is like 33rd for life expectancy, compared to South East Asia and Middle East herbs from the Americas are shit, it's almost as if being "un-American" is a *good* thing.

 

In fact, I think it is!!

 

 

[Skyguy2005]

 

Middle East? Life expectancy 14 years.

 

 

 

AMA has always been the most prominent and influential opponent to this godawful, shameful, socialist, commie and utterly un-American idea of the universal healthcare.  

 

 

America is like 33rd for life expectancy, compared to South East Asia and Middle East herbs from the Americas are shit, it's almost as if being "un-American" is a *good* thing.

 

In fact, I think it is!!

 

 

 

Just dont mention Japan. Or South Korea. Or even Jiangsu province of China.

 

Ginkgo, Reishi, Rosemary, Garlic, Valerian, Ginger, Sage, Thyme, Turmeric, Chinese Skullcap, Sweet Wormwood, Jiaogulan, Japanese Knotweed (best source of resveratrol), Japanese Raisin Tree, Mint, Lemongrass, Coriander etc. All Asian.