4 ms·
Why should we allow self appointed "biomedical ethicists" to dictate what interventions we can use? The medical industry seems to be largely divided into two c
by causi 4y ago
Why should we allow self appointed "biomedical ethicists" to dictate what interventions we can use?
The medical industry seems to be largely divided into two camps: Camp A would happily sell allergy medication that triples your risk of diabetes, and Camp B would rather ten thousand terminal patients die in agony than kill a hundred of them with medication that cured the rest.
It's simply the momentum of the world we live in. It's perfectly legal for a 45 year old woman to get pregnant by an elderly man, then chainsmoke, take caffeine pills, and get shitfaced every day of her pregnancy and create a profoundly disadvantaged baby whose life will be full of hardship. They can even do it on purpose if they want. The powers-that-be don't give a damn about human happiness or suffering; they just want to make sure it isn't them who gets blamed.
- depereo 4y agoI would suggest that 'the medical world' has fringes like that you describe but that the overwhelming, vast majority would take a significantly more nuanced view. Honestly even that description is massively underselling how much more comprehensive the ethical views of 100% of the medical profession has here. The fringes like that are a tiny rounding error.
- ska 4y agoThis is a wildly inaccurate take. There probably exist examples of both the extremes you describe, but in such small numbers as to probably be irrelevant. On the whole the industry is conservative but changes fairly quickly.