Well, you SHOULD understand. I'm speaking in term of "loss of lives over the long run". Your words. More "loss of lives over the long run" is the bad alternative, when an alternative exists of less "loss of lives over the long run", which is the good one.

You seem to be writing your responses as if I were claiming that "it's ok to trash the environment", or something, which is not true (see my other comments in this thread).

Anyway, I'm bored, sorry.