Extropic Priorities

From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@aeiveos.com)
Date: Wed Mar 05 2003 - 00:45:25 MST

  • Next message: Lee Corbin: "RE: Join the not-knowers, was RE: Giant anti-war demonstration in Melbourne (IRAQ)"

    For those concerned with setting priorities (for humanity)
    I offer the following.

    A recent "New Scientist" report documents that we are losing
    56 million people a year (deaths) and that it is likely that
    poor diet (including obesity in large part) contributes to
    60 percent of those deaths and nearly half the global burden
    of disease. Note that "obesity" means you are consuming *more*
    of the planetary resources than is necessary to survive.
    Also note that I include myself in this category, so I'm
    not pointing fingers without including myself.

    Thus the U.S. could eliminate the entire population of Iraq
    (~24 million people, a one time event) and still be
    causing significantly less "extropic" damage than
    excess caloric consumption is doing (*each* year).

    So, *why* the blazes is the ExI list debating IRAQ when
    it should be debating caloric intake? Just what part
    of the principle of "rational thinking" is not being
    understood (e.g. saving more people is perhaps better
    than saving fewer people)? While I will freely
    admit that saving any and all people is preferable
    but that just isn't the world we live in -- particularly
    when some of those people view it as their "job"
    to eliminate others. One has to take sides and one
    has to act. Where are the really extropic actors
    who recognize just where the leverage points are?

    The point of the above diatribe is that one might save
    many more people with some carefully executed interventions
    in obesity than days upon days of discussion about Iraq.
    Food for thought (I hope).

    (I apologize to any Iraqi citizens on the list for the
    use of the above example, but I'm trying to make an
    "extropic" point and must sometimes use extreme examples.)

    Robert

    Refs.
    Cut sugar to battle obesity, says report. (3 Mar 2003)
    http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99993453



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Mar 05 2003 - 00:50:24 MST