Drug discovery is an unfortunate example, as we've gotten steadily worse at it as our population has grown.
It's odd that everyone believes we have developed a lot of miracle drugs in the last 30 years.
We're discovering fewer, but not none. For instance, there are forms of leukemia that we have almost cured in the last 15 years. HIV seems like another good example.
HIV is the other good example. I'm pushing back against your argument that we need to make more people or we'll stop finding teh drugs. We were far better at finding them back when we had less than half the current population.
Do you really think there's a correlation between population and drug discovery effectiveness? I know part of the hypothesis here is that we generate huge amounts of data and not enough analysis, but analysis parallelizes too, right?
No, I don't think there's any correlation. I'm poking a hole in a tangential part of your argument, in the finest tradition of message board pedantry. We used to search for drugs differently, it was about 80x more effective, and therefore we could make way fewer people and still come out ahead if we just switched back.
I admit that the drug discovery thing was unnecessary filigree for an argument that could have rested with "we need more children so that old people don't end up starving to death".
That is a dark and satisfying way to put it. The elderly hunger for tender young flesh.
God you are the worst.
Re:Desperate not to have children
by kasey_junk on Tuesday November 24, 2015 @09:28AM
(#10620846)
s/worst/best/
Pretty much the whole of western civilization is organized around and dependent on families having kids.