> The literal title of this submission is "I lied when I said we did everything we could". If what I'm saying is conspiracy, so is this article.

I think you totally missed the point of the article. The doctor there did what you advocate, it's just that he doesn't consider that doing everything they can.

I didn't miss anything, and no the doctor didn't do what I advocate. Sure maybe in the local maxima sense he did, but there's a whole long period of time where more can be done.

The implication you were deriving from the title is still erroneous.

In any case, how exactly do you know what they didn't do that they could have? I don't see where you get enough information to derive any such conclusion. Considering that the doctor writing the article was just an intern, chances are he doesn't know everything they tried; how can you possibly claim to know?

You don't get to just declare that I'm wrong without demonstrating it, sorry.

I can claim to know because of all the comments in this thread, because I've had loved ones get terminally sick, because I know what every doctor says when you ask them about this, and the stark reality is it's more about the masses than it is about the individual.

We literally can't try everything on everyone because that'd lower the average level of care overall, not to mention the ethical concerns over experimental treatments that haven't been sufficiently tested.

We both have experiences with terminally sick loved ones; but our disagreement comes from the interpretation of the text, not from those.

Not really, no. My comment was about the general thrust of the content of the text, not any specific line.

You can interpret the text however you want, it's still entirely topical to call out the medical profession on the false notion of death as peace that they're trying to sell us for their own sakes, at our expense.