We debate about healthcare .... thanks to science!

As always, Heather Mac Donald is on target and without too many words:

The current fury over government-subsidized medicine, alleged rationing, and end-of-life health care has been made possible, however, only because science has pursued a “culture of life” with patient rigor and dedication, allowing human beings to keep each other alive long past the sell-by date of decaying organs and a fragile nervous system. The parade of horribles that Enlightenment naysayers usually trot out—mostly Nazi eugenics and possible atomic warfare—is short compared to the astounding benefits that scientific skepticism and the demand for empirical proof have showered upon humanity.

Yes, the advancement of science has had quite a few side-effects that have not been good to humanity or the planet. But, we have to go forward with science, making sure we are able to prevent mistakes as much as possible.
A long time ago, back when I was in high school, one of the essays we read in our English class was by Isaac Asimov, where he provided an argument for "no way but forward"--I think that was the phrase he used in that essay. Of course, he was a science guy--a doctorate in biochem--and a science fiction guy thinking about what the future might be like. But, in that essay he did recognize the kind of side-effects that Mac Donald points out.

To some extent, we won't know what the (mis)uses of a scientific advancement might until after the event. So, a precautionary principle might not be of much help either.

At the end of it all, what we are dealing with now is a "happy" problem--about quality of life as we get old, about whether spending thousands of dollars only to extend life by three months is worth it, etc. I way prefer these problems to what used to be the past: mothers dying in childbirth, infants dying before their first birthday, most adults not living past 50 years of age, ....

Life is wonderful now. Thanks to science and rational thinking. Enjoy it!