You know, I do find this conversation slightly amusing. Here we are on a survival forum of all places, discussing the cons of modern medical procedures that might very well save one's life - but which some apparently find too "grisly" for their taste...

Maybe it's just me but I happen to find that somewhat ironic. Also, it makes me wonder about that No. 1 commodity in any survival situation, the will to live. To keep on fighting no matter what, even when it hurts like hell and your chances are basically zero.

If somebody decides to turn down life-saving medical assistance out of entirely irrational fears or prejudice I think it's a pretty good sign that their will to live is lacking. Not really conducive to "survival" of any shape or form IMHO.

Please, do not take this the wrong way. I am not trying to judge anyone. If anything, I really appreciate Benjammin's honesty when talking about these fears openly. Then again, I like to think of that old saying - no pain, no gain.

Just a few days ago someone very close to me has had a somewhat "routine" but no less grisly surgery that, if gone wrong, could confine that person to a wheelchair. Fortunately, it seems the surgery was a success and that person's quality of life is going to improve drastically.

Would that person agree to the same procedure without anesthesia? Probably not, no way to carry out a surgery like that unless the patient is sedated and restrained. But that's not even an issue right now - anesthesia is available, for the time being at least, and it's not quite TEOTWAWKI... So what is the point, really?