>

Without medicine you might’ve been dead by now
Let’s talk after a Dr tells you “you have cancer” or some other life threatening illness. >

As long as they can manage my pain until my death I'm good. >

Some people like their lives and want to live though. >


We are meant to die when we're meant to die, saving people is messing with the natural balance of nature.

So don't live in a house.  Don't wear clothes for warmth.  Don't use glasses, or take ibuprofen for a headache.
You fuck with nature all the time for your own comfort and well-being.  If you think that's such a bad thing, I expect you to go be a cave dwelling hermit away from society, starting today. >

Or use your phone, or go to a grocery store. Move into the woods and hunt shit and gather until you die >

Food, water, and shelter are more common and accessible than they were in the past.
That’s a big part of why people aren’t dying so young anymore. >

i'd argue for many food and water are much more common than they would have been 200-300 years ago. Imagine trying to buy berries in the winter time, or wanting to take a warm shower then. The fact that obesity is a problem is a testament to at the very least calorie abundance. >

It's not about increasing our lifespans, but about increasing our quality of life.
The extended lifespan is just a side-effect.
Having said that, you're going to decline any modern medical care because of your personal beliefs, right?
After all;

We are meant to die when we're meant to die, saving people is messing with the natural balance of nature. >

Yeah and that side effect will directly lead to a more populated earth. Not saying I agree with OP, but it’s just a fact. >

The world being overpopulated may be a fact. But OP suggesting that we should refuse to save people's lives because their medical prognosis is "natural" will never sit right with me. I don't think OPs solution is on the right lines. >

I wonder if you’ll still feel that way when you hit your 50s and up. >

I think that the argument that we're unnecessarily prolonging aging peoples lives is pretty valid. Prolonging the life of someone who's 103, with severe dementia and poor quality of life is certainly debatable. 
However I think the way you've structured your argument and what you've based it on is a terrible way to look at it. Most lives are definitely worth saving if we can. >

Shit hot take. Upvote >

Don’t use any western medicine >

This sounds so stupid. When we're "meant" to die? You could use that logic and say that anything man-made isn't good because it wasn't "meant" to be. If we died when we were "meant" to the average human life expectancy would be like 30. >

i agree with you. Humans will make up any reason to stay relevant to themselves. Beyond being useless to make any difference in the world, humans will create any reason to keep on going, mostly to keep going on for themselves, despite their very expired usefulness.
This is why I am a misanthrope, for life which I hope is short lived and left up to nature's fury. >

This is true ever seen the living dead in nursing homes, life is worthless after a certain point. >

We have NO IDEA how long we SHOULD be living! We've been poisoned for so long, that GOD KNOWS how long we actually SHOULD be living... Add non-stop STRESS to the mix... I bet we're living at least HALF of what we SHOULD! >

Its a punch in the face to evolution in time we will see it's consequences >

We're also not meant to be able to talk to people thousands of miles away instantaneously, so off the internet you get. >

society acts like there's a shortage of old people in desperately trying to keep them alive. >

I’m gonna be the odd ball out here and agree with you. The world is overpopulated, doesn’t take a genius to realize that when life spans go up this problem will only get worse. >

The world is not overpopulated >

In 1960 the world had 3.5 billion people, today we are at around 7.8 billion. The United Nations predicts an increase of about 3.5 billion people by 2100 if our current trend continues. >

Increasing population is not the same as over population. >

Yes, but when the population is increasing by the billion in an increasingly short amount of time I think that would qualify as overpopulation. >

I don't want to gamble on the afterlife. What if you just remain concious in darkness alone forever? Until you can scietifically prove otherwise, I'll prefer to not die, thanks. >

Go live in the woods naked then. >

Don't threaten me with a good time.