Thanks for the sarcasm, but it's misplaced. The short-term risk without the 'procedure' is about 20%, not anywhere near 100%. That can be altered by a number of lifestyle choices. Nevertheless, stats only give predictions for populations. Individuals are another matter.
If the 'procedure' means I can't walk or think straight, who else but the person experiencing these things is qualified to decide whether the side effects are worth it? I realize that others may have a different take on this. I haven't come to this decision lightly. For me, it's right.
__________________
The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated. - Ghandi
|