 If we interpret the threshold as an element of a sufficiency conception of intergenerational justice the threshold identifies a sufficiency standard which all people have a priority claim to achieve. Such an interpretation is supported by a view of the currency of well-being that helps explain why failure to meet the threshold significantly harms people. Basic needs are such a view. If people cannot satisfy their basic needs, they are necessarily and severely damaged: necessarily as the damage does not occur because of special environmental conditions or as the person concerned has special characteristics. Rather, it is because of such conditions and characteristics that currently apply and will remain foreseeably and largely unchanged (Wiggins 1998: 15). The damage is significant because it undermines the conditions for the possibility of a minimally good life (Wiggins 1998: 14). For example, if a person has no access to food, this leads to apathy, organ damage or even death of the person. Such damage is physiologically necessary, regardless of, for example, the nationality, social status or religion of the person concerned. Being able to satisfy basic needs when understood in this way can be protected for reasons of justice by ascribing the corresponding moral rights. The same list of such rights is attributed to all people (wherever and whenever they live), which does not exclude the possibility that changing social, economic and cultural conditions also change the means of satisfying basic needs (the so-called satisfiers of basic needs) (see, e.g., Braybrooke 1987; Sen 1984; Nussbaum 2000: 132–133; Page 2006: 71–75).