NationStates Jolt Archive

Everywhere on NS, you see things that are conceivably possible in the real-world such as uber-stealth jets, super-dreadnoughts and legions of MBTs and Or-tillery. Of course these things will never be developed in real life because they are far too expensive and impractical and in a lot of cases a bit silly. One thing you don't see is what the NS world looks like medically.

Would it be fair for me to say in-character that my nation has cures for all forms of cancer? Alzheimer's? ALS? What about a vaccine for AIDS? All of these things are possible in real life. And considering NS budgets lap those of any RL nations budget it'd be more than possible for these things to happen. What do you think?

Blarg!.

that is my two cents.(tagg for later consideration.kewen.)

Opinion of a Complete Layman

It's your country. Do what you want.

Opinion of a Complete Layman

It's your country. Do what you want.

So it'd be cool if I said the average Tocrowkian lives 100.01 years? :D

Well, you should take into account other nations as well. Other people might see you as a wanker if you're too advanced for your period (i.e, a cure for aids in a past tech nation, or bacta or similar miracle drugs in an MT setting). Future tech is definitely the easiest place to play a long-lived or very healthy country.

Well, you should take into account other nations as well. Other people might see you as a wanker if you're too advanced for your period (i.e, a cure for aids in a past tech nation, or bacta or similar miracle drugs in an MT setting). Future tech is definitely the easiest place to play a long-lived or very healthy country.
This.

Also, if you would be realistic, there would be no such thing as a disease-free country. For elimination of the major afflictions such as infections, neoplastic, and degenerative conditions, other conditions will come to the fore instead: iatrogenic, traumatic, immunologic, etc... And especially for a long-lived population, degenerative and neoplastic conditions will be very prevalent.

Well, you should take into account other nations as well. Other people might see you as a wanker if you're too advanced for your period (i.e, a cure for aids in a past tech nation, or bacta or similar miracle drugs in an MT setting). Future tech is definitely the easiest place to play a long-lived or very healthy country.

My nation is PMT. I'd hardly say any of what I suggested is too advanced, considering it's possible in our world...just not yet brought to fruition.

What if your nation gets the VODAIS issue? You have to put all your people on an island or make them wear patches or kill them all!!!! You can't get around it by curing it!!!!

Cancer/AIDS cures are impossible. :(

I'd say it's a combination of reasonable behavior, and the individual nation's condition.

Cancer/AIDS cures are impossible. :(

Nu-uh.

Nu-uh.

Drexleresqe Nanotech is the only thing I can think of that would work. :(

Cancer/AIDS cures are impossible. :(

Depends on what you mean. A one-stop solution is pretty implausible in MT/PMT, but it is reasonable to assume a more advanced civilization would have many new techniques at its disposal to deal with these conditions.

Considering the cost required to build semi-concievable stuff in massive yet expendable quantities that do not contribute to the economy, I'd say health care in supposedly "developed" nations would be somewhat behind.

Considering the cost required to build semi-concievable stuff in massive yet expendable quantities that do not contribute to the economy, I'd say health care in supposedly "developed" nations would be somewhat behind.

Perhaps. But perhaps not.

think it would fall into FT tech level and then you still have new things poping up

So it'd be cool if I said the average Tocrowkian lives 100.01 years? :D



Eh, Google SENS.

There are biologists who say it's possible to get the average lifespan up to 1500+ years.

If you made a story and comprehensible RP about the financial and intellectual struggle of your people to find the cure for Cancer, like if emulating the same struggle of investing major resources for accomplishing the "Cure for Cancer" wonder in a Civilization game, I would really appreciate it. Now if you just make an one-lined post "Look I found the cure for AIDS", then I would not really find it very accomplishing.

*Edit: Remember that you need a budget to research this stuff, and that it's unlikely that the private sector would be interested, because spending countless millions to research the cure of a disease to which you sell medicines to eliminate the symptoms isn't a very profitable venue, unless you wish to cripple the competition and have plans to move to another market. And no matter if it's done by government or private companies, doing such will be diverting part of your GDP that could be otherwise applied to things like... military research.

(Sorry if this counts as an unwarranted gravedig. And sorry to only talk about AIDS.)

As part of my job I have to read the IAVI bulletin (http://www.iavi.org/), and sometimes encounter publications on microbicides or pre-exposure prophylaxis. These are definite possibilities, that could be RPed in my view - and to very interesting effect. But to be realistic, I think you would have to take into account some of these considerations:

- Would your nation actually have devoted considerable resources to a cure? Most nations seem to RP as First World, developed nations and rarely do any nations voluntary claim to be suffering AIDS epidemics. If your population's AIDS incidence is low, it therefore seems unlikely you would have, on your own, made the necessary investment.

- If you have dependencies that suffer AIDS blights, or work in a big alliance that might take interest in such a thing, then it's much more probable.

- You would presumably need to take into account how the international community would react to such advances. Would they try to steal your invention? To manufacture generic alternatives to the drugs?

- Bottom line is, if you're a developed nation with low AIDS incidence, I really doubt you would have seriously invested in a vaccine: it'd be much cheaper to fund basic prophylaxis and treatment, and the AIDS lobby would be too small to gain political momentum. If you're a poor country with high AIDS incidence, then even hundreds of years into future you would, on your own, probably lack the resources.

I see one issue, the more antibiotics and cures you put out there, the more antibiotic resistant diseases that will develop. It would be impossible to cure everything, because your cure would not be 100%, and then, such things being living, they would reproduce, giving you a new form of the disease that is resistant to your cure. The other issue would be, if you eliminated all of them, and your people never got sick, their immune systems would be unable to deal with even the most simple of diseases. Just my two cents.

Depends. Usually people may make themselves good in one area, but, just out of fairness, they then shoot themselves in the foot in another. For instance, if you send hundreds of thousands of people to be doctors to research the cure for cancer, maybe your research into computer technology, or mechanical technology suffered as a result?