@dougiec3 May I ask in sort of a cold but caring way...

Let's say it's medical research is cut ... and that I'm coming from the idea that it's a lot of tech based things (too much which out-balanced the perks at the end which gets monetised or something else unseen etc) and if we have enough (like we're living to 80 more often etc)... like when is it enough - or yes if you would have Parkinson's you might want to have it solved (so it's not length of time but cures) but honestly THERE IS A BIG HUMAN *AND* MONETARY COST to pay and frankly having more "DNR" written in your wallet might be better or just ending it earlier if one is inclined that way already to choose / have it said before...

What I'm trying to get at is the cost (including politics) which we could actually (maybe) lose "baggage of" or re-focus in making friends (not money) and not living for so long either (the old people including Trump and Musk are dragging us into crap and could go sooner - #USPol hashtag for current list of crap!).

So we're saving too many people is one way (heavy on us all / costing earth / who manages and profits etc is what I mean)....

So I'm looking for the extra-extra perks considering how far already we have things (and #diminishingreturns we now see too in many ways anyway power-based / used for money / weaponised).

Can't have medical stuff without politics - and I know a few and they give no shits about politics and follow even in abusive medical centres.. (they accept it / want to keep their head and job going).

A lot of ammunition my side, but said caringly and written fast (hope you can do that too not all based on emotions but the points, quite quickly to ping pong as I do want to understand)...

Title was:
Ending U.S. #scientific #medical #research (Is it that bad ? Considering how far we are already and is maybe enough (and doesn't damage things politically or technologically more?)