The ethics of medication/supplementation

[Spazzzzy]

I was just thinking (as i do because im a 150+ IQ Turbo Chad with 8" Cawk) about supplementation and what i would or wouldn't do and why, without anything specific in mind, kinda like unfocused meditative state subconscious thinking (you peasants probably can't achieve this) and the thought came across my mind of whether it is ethical to not do something if it makes you better.

Then im thinking, well most guys over 50 or 60 are taking blood anticoagulants, blood pressure and blood sugar medication as a given these days. They would argue that it would be unethical to not let them take it because it allows them to live longer and with a higher quality of life than not taking it (i.e. be better, supraphysiological performance on baseline - raise life expectancy by 20 years over the past 40 years).

So the next step is to think, well what measure of life improvement makes something ethical or not. If it makes you live longer is that the only way to make supplementation/medication ethical or is it from a life enhancement/improvement perspective? If it allows you to achieve your goals (whatever it may be) is it ethical to stop someone from doing that if it doesn't impinge on the life of someone else (again, by prolonging someones natural life that will inadvertently impinge on the lives of others, intended or otherwise).

Then the next step is, is it ethical to not do something that you can reasonably expect to improve the life/style of your progeny. Is it ethical not to work harder to give your children a better lifestyle and to bestow upon them any advantage possible (be it better food, better education, better pussy with better genetics...etc).

Then on the flip side, people say "well if i can't achieve it naturally it is unethical". Then in 20 years when they are about to die they say "oh well i didn't mean it like that lol haha"

Hmmm... wutcha think brahs

[Critter5592]

OP the type to talk instead of hitting the L

[Spazzzzy]

OP the type to talk instead of hitting the L

Gooby pls

[Ratfish]

I was just thinking (as i do because im a 150+ IQ Turbo Chad with 8" Cawk) about supplementation and what i would or wouldn't do and why, without anything specific in mind, kinda like unfocused meditative state subconscious thinking (you peasants probably can't achieve this) and the thought came across my mind of whether it is ethical to not do something if it makes you better.

Then im thinking, well most guys over 50 or 60 are taking blood anticoagulants, blood pressure and blood sugar medication as a given these days. They would argue that it would be unethical to not let them take it because it allows them to live longer and with a higher quality of life than not taking it (i.e. be better, supraphysiological performance on baseline - raise life expectancy by 20 years over the past 40 years).

So the next step is to think, well what measure of life improvement makes something ethical or not. If it makes you live longer is that the only way to make supplementation/medication ethical or is it from a life enhancement/improvement perspective? If it allows you to achieve your goals (whatever it may be) is it ethical to stop someone from doing that if it doesn't impinge on the life of someone else (again, by prolonging someones natural life that will inadvertently impinge on the lives of others, intended or otherwise).

Then the next step is, is it ethical to not do something that you can reasonably expect to improve the life/style of your progeny. Is it ethical not to work harder to give your children a better lifestyle and to bestow upon them any advantage possible (be it better food, better education, better pussy with better genetics...etc).

Then on the flip side, people say "well if i can't achieve it naturally it is unethical". Then in 20 years when they are about to die they say "oh well i didn't mean it like that lol haha"

Hmmm... wutcha think brahs

[maddog352002]

If you were 150+ you'd already know.

[onaed]

How can prolonging someones natural life impinge on the life of someone else? (intended or otherwise)

[Brozef]

Great first paragraph. What a way to set up a thread for serious, thoughtful replies.

Fuk you, you arrogant dork.

[TheAdlerian]

Then on the flip side, people say "well if i can't achieve it naturally it is unethical". Then in 20 years when they are about to die they say "oh well i didn't mean it like that lol haha"

Hmmm... wutcha think brahs

There's different schools of ethical thought you know, and which one would that be?

It's the exact opposite of what's called "utilitarian ethics" meaning that it's okay to do what works best.

[suprabum]

there are no ethics in capitalism.. buy what you don't need so others can acquire vacation homes

[Spazzzzy]

How can prolonging someones natural life impinge on the life of someone else? (intended or otherwise)

If you're meant to die at 60 but are extended another 20 years you will use resources, time, energy..etc of those that you come into contact with.

Say it there wasn't this current boomer problem approaching. Less money spent on welfare (most countries spend close to 50% on welfare which a large proportion is age pension, healthcare...etc) they can spend it on improving life for those who are living. Boomers and older are for the most part unproductive just as children are. The retirement age was set at 65 which was the life expectancy 40 years ago. Now people are retiring at 65 and living another 20, 30, 40 years (which is as long as they are working - hypothetically they are only working 50% of their life if they reach 90) which is a huge weight on everything especially when most people don't cover their costs whilst they are working (people paying $10k a year in taxes don't cover themselves in any way shape or form).

So then it comes to the point of if you can do things in your current life to improve outcomes, is it unethical to do so be it "supplementation" or other.