some essential and/or highly valued feature of how we chose to live our individual lifemay not be the best action for us to take. Life as a vegetable is not generally considered adesirable life and if the only way to preserve one’s ability to go on living was to submit toa surgery with a high risk of permanent quadriplegia an individual ought to be able tochoose to almost certainly cease living just as they ought to be able to chouse to take therisk. Some aspects about what makes life worth living can be assumed as well as some of the risks or actualities which generally make it unbearable but “assumed” does not meanstatic or always true. An individual might be perfectly happy in an existence so long asthey were not in great pain and could read, listen to music, see images and contemplateall day everyday. Another individual would want to risk a very high likelihood of death toremain highly mobile as long as they could and consider a primarily static life not worthliving. An individual might choose to put everything in the outcome of a newexperimental treatment or refuse treatment to satisfy a belief that they ought to put their fate in their higher power’s hands solely. Medicine should not presume to know whatwould be best on the whole for people. Medicine also should not limit itself to technologyand research that are difficult to abuse at the cost of potentially highly beneficialtechniques and findings. Medicine itself should not have to limit its discoveries to thingswhich people are unlikely to use for immoral or even unjust purposes. Medicine shouldmake every effort that in its progress it does nothing unjust, and nothing immoral withoutoutweighing good cause, but what is done with its discoveries is not its job to concernitself with until it is told to and how to by society through the government (if the progresswas made in good faith and to help promote health).