[masterleep]

If I am dying, what right have you to tell me what experimental treatment I can take or not, if I otherwise have no hope to live? You would condemn me to no hope at all in order to save me from what you consider to be unproven or possible quackery.

[eesmith]

We are all dying. We are all condemned. So if you're going to use such emotional words, at least ground it in real-world examples.

Here's a real-world example - https://www.livescience.com/4040-dying-desperate-lure-quack-... .

People in the US in the last months of their lives, in desperation, go to Mexico for "treatment" by methods which have never ever worked.

> One hospital we visited offered homeopathic treatments. (Homeopathy is a form of quack medicine essentially based on the mystical principle of "like cures like.")

> Another, respectable-looking hospital offered such "alternative" treatments for cancer as shark cartilage, mega-doses of vitamins, and "prayer therapy." The hospital also offered Laetrile, a notorious cancer treatment discredited by repeated scientific studies.

> ... Donsbach's clinic had a reputation for providing questionable medical procedures, including "ultraviolet blood purification," colonics (a potentially dangerous colon-irrigation therapy), and the use of microwaves to "heat" cancer cells.

This is what you want, everywhere, yes?

[masterleep]

I believe in the right of individual self determination in matters of life and death, even to the point of foolishness, yes.

[eesmith]

It would have been easier if you had said that my first statement was essentially correct - your belief is based on an ideological consideration which rejects government oversight on the broad topic of "life and death."