> In communism, would you really want to extract the equivalent of $50m of labour and resources in order to provide one person with this test? I can't imagine h

> In communism, would you really want to extract the equivalent of $50m of labour and resources in order to provide one person with this test? I can't imagine how that would be affordable. You don't need to invoke the boogeyman of "communism", in advanced developed societies there's plenty of examples of expensive treatments being provided to the edge cases of healthcare because it's such a minuscule amount of people suffering from these illnesses that on the overall scheme of things it's not a huge burden to society to allow someone to live if they have a chance. Before you bring it up: yes, of course it's not perfect, of course some people do not get access to some treatments but it's overall a much better outcome than leaving people to fend for themselves and pay for treatments inaccessible to any non-millionaire. If your only morality is through economic/financial terms I really invite you to question why you think that way, there are many other ways to think of trade-offs for providing access to specialty life-saving treatments even if it's at a cost to society, it just depends on what you think should be valuable. To me, life is valuable, and if a society can support giving more treatments at a loss to create less suffering it's a good society.