SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the but-what-dreams-may-come-when-I-have-shuffled-off-this-mortal-coil? dept.
Ezekiel J. Emanuel, director of the Clinical Bioethics Department at the US National Institutes of Health, writes at The Atlantic that there is a simple truth that many of us seem to resist: living too long renders many of us, if not disabled, then faltering and declining, a state that may not be worse than death but is nonetheless deprived. "It robs us of our creativity and ability to contribute to work, society, the world. It transforms how people experience us, relate to us, and, most important, remember us. We are no longer remembered as vibrant and engaged but as feeble, ineffectual, even pathetic." Emanuel says that he is isn't asking for more time than is likely nor foreshortening his life but is talking about the kind and amount of health care he will consent to after 75. "Once I have lived to 75, my approach to my health care will completely change. I won’t actively end my life. But I won’t try to prolong it, either." Emanuel says that Americans seem to be obsessed with exercising, doing mental puzzles, consuming various juice and protein concoctions, sticking to strict diets, and popping vitamins and supplements, all in a valiant effort to cheat death and prolong life as long as possible. "I reject this aspiration. I think this manic desperation to endlessly extend life is misguided and potentially destructive. For many reasons, 75 is a pretty good age to aim to stop."
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 23 2014, @05:50PM
I think you misunderstand. He's looked at the epidemiology and come to the conclusion that old-old people today, when they're being encouraged to participate in all of these health and mind improving activities, are actually less healthy than they were 20 years ago. Essentially, medicine is keeping people alive who would otherwise have died, and as a consequence, the population of old people is even more frail and more dependent on continuing care. He is asserting that zealous exercise and diet don't really improve things, but I think he would distinguish between zealous exercise (not helpful) and sedentary, gluttonous lifestyle (actively harmful). But I think he argument is less about exercise and diet, and more about medical intervention. TFS picked out the exercise, diet, and pills bit, but I think that's just inflammatory. I think his point is more that people are dramatically changed by a major intervention (bypass surgery, chemotherapy, joint replacement) both physically and mentally, such that they never recover their pre-intervention activity. TFA doesn't say he's giving up exercise (the dude just climbed Kilimanjaro, for gods' sake), but that he's giving up medical interventions. He's basically saying that your body is built to last (whether you can influence that with diet & exercise or not), and that dramatic, end-of-life interventions can add years to that time, but they are not years that he wants. He doesn't want to live forever, if forever is going to suck.
(Score: 2) by digitalaudiorock on Tuesday September 23 2014, @07:09PM
I just don't read it that way at all. Here's an exact quote:
All the things he's blasting there are in fact good, especially exercise...for both longevity (possibly) and certainly for quality of life. I can't imagine how you're reading that. He's sure not talking about medical intervention there, heroic or otherwise, and what he's saying is frankly inexcusable.