It is possible to keep a human being alive even if the heart, lungs, kidneys, and digestive tract are not functioning by using heart-lung machines in conjunction with kidney dialysis and intravenous feeding. This implies that the basic physical principles involved in the functioning of these systems is well understood because the natural functions can be duplicated with mechanical devices. However, these machines are expensive and require considerable maintenance. Should society be spending money to develop smaller, more efficient mechanisms that could be used to replace diseased or damaged hearts, lungs, and kidneys? Debate this question.

Consider the following in your debate: What is an individual's life worth in monetary terms? Should it matter that the person chose to engage in unhealthy behaviors? If the same amount of money were spent for other programs would more lives be saved? What is the quality of life of person's using these devices? How long should a person live? Should people in rich countries spend money on such devices when people in poor countries are dying because they do not have access to safe drinking water?