5 ms·

Why have we spent $2 trillion so far on Iraq (even if you believed it was linked to 9/11 and 3000 deaths) when Alzheimer's disease costs $200B annually and cost

by coryrc 4y ago

Why have we spent $2 trillion so far on Iraq (even if you believed it was linked to 9/11 and 3000 deaths) when Alzheimer's disease costs $200B annually and costing about 5 million a few decades of life? (I'm approximating lost QALY as ~5 million/year, or about 20x 9/11s every year) We should be investing in high ROI life-saving actions, not emotional impulses. Let's put serious money behind defeating aging, which currently has a 100% fatality rate and was highly comorbid with COVID-19. https://www.alzheimers.net/research-spending-vs-annual-care-costs https://www.alzheimers.net/research-spending-vs-annual-care-...

erddfre3423 4y ago
Defeating aging sounds like a horrible idea as long as we aren't able to conquer space. The planet is badly overpopulated already as it is.
- astrange 4y ago
  The world is nowhere near overpopulated, most countries are going to see population crashes if anything. “Overpopulation” is a meme from the 60s coming from a book (Population Bomb) that was disproved the instant it was published. It is, however, a big reason for single family zoning in California - they literally thought it would encourage people to stop moving there and having kids.
  - fractallyte 4y ago
    Overpopulation - a number - is the wrong metric. Instead, we should be looking at the mix of factors (which include overpopulation) that cause the destruction of ecosystems, all the way up to climate change. So that would include: mono-agriculture ('monoculture'), technology powered by fossil fuels (such as logging machines, strip mining machines, etc.), and global transport networks (which hugely enable demand to outstrip supply). More complicated, but more accurate - and humanity is way past that threshold, even with population crashes.
- inglor_cz 4y ago
  Long lived organisms tend to procreate less. If you look at fertility of humanity right now, it is obvious that countries with the lowest life expectancy are experiencing the biggest population booms. Long lived nations aren't even sustaining themselves.

by coryrc 4y ago

erddfre3423 4y ago

Defeating aging sounds like a horrible idea as long as we aren't able to conquer space. The planet is badly overpopulated already as it is.

astrange 4y ago
The world is nowhere near overpopulated, most countries are going to see population crashes if anything. “Overpopulation” is a meme from the 60s coming from a book (Population Bomb) that was disproved the instant it was published. It is, however, a big reason for single family zoning in California - they literally thought it would encourage people to stop moving there and having kids.
- fractallyte 4y ago
  Overpopulation - a number - is the wrong metric. Instead, we should be looking at the mix of factors (which include overpopulation) that cause the destruction of ecosystems, all the way up to climate change. So that would include: mono-agriculture ('monoculture'), technology powered by fossil fuels (such as logging machines, strip mining machines, etc.), and global transport networks (which hugely enable demand to outstrip supply). More complicated, but more accurate - and humanity is way past that threshold, even with population crashes.
inglor_cz 4y ago
Long lived organisms tend to procreate less. If you look at fertility of humanity right now, it is obvious that countries with the lowest life expectancy are experiencing the biggest population booms. Long lived nations aren't even sustaining themselves.