By controlling medical research funds, you are in a position to guarantee that a cure will be found in 15 years for any disease you choose. Unfortunately, no progress on any others would be made during that period. Would you target one disease?
No, I wouldn’t. What if researchers are only five years away from a cure for cancer, but I’ve decided that all they’re gonna work on is athlete’s foot? Fifteen years from now, no one will have itchy feet, but cancer will still have claimed millions of lives.
What would you do?
*The Question of the Week can be found in The Book of Questions by Gregory Stock, Ph.D.
The Confusing Middle 
That would be SO hard to decide. So I wouldn’t do it. But I would agonize over that decision. Don’t ask such hard questions.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Only life saving diseases only. Like no Athlete’s foot, because no one is really going to die from that. But focus on a life threatening disease every 5 years. YES. Then, we’ll have over-population because no one will be passing- which presents an entirely different issue with jobs, food, water, and housing.
LikeLike