[dentalperson]

I genuinely want to understand this mindset. Are you only against things that help extend lifespan a very large amount, or is it more nuanced?

80 years was only achieved recently because of various quality of life and medical advances. Do you feel that those are 'ok' for other reasons, or for example, that things that cure cancer, HIV, or better sanitation that increase lifespan should also be repealed if it was up to you? Or do you feel we just happen to have the perfect amount of life-extending conditions at this exact moment?

[morbicer]

We are at a point in history that many people can live up to the natural limits of human body. They don't die during childbirth or as very young children, because of bad sanitization or through unlucky sickness.

Those improvements in healthcare are fine in my eyes. Someone could argue that dying because of some illness that we cured is also natural. Perhaps yes, but for me the baseline is healing the "unlucky" instances - viruses, cancers etc.

My golden standard worth aiming for is someone like the nonagenarians in Sardinia or Okinawa - someone who ate healthy food, lived in a tight happy community, low amount of stress and lucky to evade any serious illness. Those people still die and this is fine.

I would like everyone to have a chance to live like this, this to me is the natural limit of human body.

I am not a fan of extending life beyond this limit.