Obviously, relying only on the generosity of organ donors won’t narrow the gap between organ supply and demand.
We can always take a few uh ...
unwilling donors.
We will save more lives than are "taken" so its at least worth a thought.
Ironically, there are scientists that have to spend more time writing grants and reporting progress rather than doing the actual experiments.
efficiency at its finest.
In fact, even in this case the availability of donors would be limited and the costs would be exorbitant
Money always seems to be more important than lives
There is a lot can be improved, so many resources (time, effort and money) are unfortunately spent just for bureaucracy. Thinking about the cost of a therapy is also important in my opinion otherwise, only a few people will be able to afford it. Ideally, we want to create cheap options so they would be available to everyone.
"create cheap options"
The majority of options are inherently cheap, the problem is the massive inefficiencies of market systems.
"only a few people will be able to afford it"
We have more than enough to go around, there is no need to shift the burden onto those who need it
I think this is a sensitive topic and probably it may deserve a post on its own. I am interested in hearing your view and if you were to make a post about it I would gladly read it
just look up anarchist spain, they had it right
distribution of medical devices unfortunately is a lucrative business, that's where most money is wasted. You are right, the government could easily subsidize medical expenses, unfortunately they spend our money in other ways (eg. wars, saving banks). Especially in the US this is a major issue
The government is just another player in the market. Government regulations are not what will change this