←back to thread

360 points danielmorozoff | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
devinprater ◴[] No.45030311[source]
I'll let other blind people go first, but I'm definitely some one that would love, love, love to be able to see. Driving, knowing body language, playing any and every video game out there, shoot yeah!
replies(5): >>45031652 #>>45033075 #>>45033401 #>>45036614 #>>45042698 #
BrandoElFollito ◴[] No.45031652[source]
Why would you not go first? If you are blind it cannot be worse (well it can, but there are always risks).

My wife went through semi-expetimental therapy (at that time) for her MS. It was tough but ultimately a net benefit.

It all depends on what is at stake - I would consider Ozempic for some weight loss but prefer, for now, go for no sugar and moderate portions. This is not life changing for me so I indeed prefer people who will benefit way more from it to go first.

replies(7): >>45032000 #>>45032119 #>>45032332 #>>45032362 #>>45032443 #>>45033938 #>>45036991 #
mathiaspoint ◴[] No.45032443[source]
From a game theory perspective it's very rare for it to make sense to be the first to try new medical interventions.
replies(1): >>45032933 #
1. aydyn ◴[] No.45032933[source]
Mate thats not game theory its common sense.
replies(1): >>45037548 #
2. sokoloff ◴[] No.45037548[source]
1 + 1 = 2 is common sense, but it’s also math.