• PhoenixDog@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 days ago

    Great, so we’re gonna keep the Boomers alive for longer. I can’t wait until our governments are run by 110 year olds.

    • Fawkes@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      This isn’t meant to keep people alive for longer than we currently do, this is an attempt to replace antibiotics, which have a very real and well understood effectiveness period that we are nearing the end of.

      • PhoenixDog@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        3 days ago

        I already have and consistently do.

        Keeping older people suffering longer is not a good thing. I’m all for medical advancements to keep a 5yo from dying of cancer, but we don’t need to keep someone who can barely walk and get around on their own in their 90s alive for another 30 years. It’s a drain on medical resources, tax revenue, social programs, etc. What does a 110yo person contribute to society as a whole? Nothing.

        I’m 39 years old. I do not want to live to be 110 and feel like a drain on not only society but my family. Once I get to the point in life I can no longer piss without a family member helping me to the bathroom, just push my ass off the balcony.

    • stickly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      When I’m old and falling apart, I’d rather have a humane assisted suicide option be socially acceptable instead of an excruciating death by random chance. The rich and powerful are always going to live longer but maybe less at risk populations (read: poor, minority, children) will die from negligence