I don't want to create a false dichotomy, but it looks like you're saying you can have either one of two things: increased comfort with a higher chance of death and cost or a maintain to the low level of comfort with a higher chance of successful recovery. You go on to say:
> After all, we live to feel good, and living is only worth it as long as we feel good doing it!
I think I get what you're going for, but I'd rather be uncomfortable in the hospital for a week in my 40s if that means I get to live another 40 or 50 years. I think a lot of other people would also feel the same.
The dichotomy is real, I know a thing or two of how hospitals work and what prioritizing comfort would actually mean. But I'd still choose it.
> but I'd rather be uncomfortable in the hospital for a week in my 40s if that means I get to live another 40 or 50 years
Yeah, if you're the 1% that could've actually died if not continuously and repeatedly checked upon and pestered with tens of mostly unnecessary tests, or if you need that expensive life saving drug whose costs would've been covered if less money were spent on better air-conditioning, lighting and soundproofing... bad luck for you. The other 99 would prefer the additional comfort. Heck, there's many people who avoid going to hospitals when they know they should because they know how uncomfortable they are, and some end up dying because of that...
> After all, we live to feel good, and living is only worth it as long as we feel good doing it!
I think I get what you're going for, but I'd rather be uncomfortable in the hospital for a week in my 40s if that means I get to live another 40 or 50 years. I think a lot of other people would also feel the same.