What? No, that's not what I'm talking about at all. What I'm talking about is sensible healthcare provisioning, under the honest observation that just because s

What? No, that's not what I'm talking about at all. What I'm talking about is sensible healthcare provisioning, under the honest observation that just because some medical intervention is technically possible, it's necessarily a good idea (from both quality of life as well as financial points of view). So no, just because it's technically possible to replace an 80 year old's hip, doesn't mean we should. There is nothing wrong with some cutoff where we say 'as a society, the maximum we want to pay for a daly is x' (or qaly or any other measure you want to take). There is nothing wrong with being honest about resources being finite, and that not every potentially possible medical intervention needs to be paid for by society. And this is what is happening in 'Europe' (although it isn't admitted as bluntly as I put it here...), and what I was referring to.