One of the great challenges in life stems from your statement, "I'm the only one who can decide what is good for me". Your statement is, of course, true for any Gulcher. The challenge is that you don't have time to be an expert at everything.

With regard to health, one can look at cancer, disease, traditional medical implants, and even tissue engineering (my most recent field) as disturbances (in the differential equations sense). That means that one should look at them from a proportional-integral-differential (PID) control standpoint. I haven't met people who look at these medical issues the way I do. My current work at minimizing COVID risk will ultimately more than fund my tissue engineering work. I continue to have a self-generated purpose, modified by the short term opportunities (like COVID) that present themselves. The people who deny ivermectin and

The key is in maintaining a purpose. If you read Galt's speech, you will see that purpose is one of three "supreme and ruling values" of one's life. If I no longer had purpose, in a time such as now, it would be very easy just to "shrug". When I "shrug" completely, I will die very soon thereafter.

Thumbs up, jbrenner.

However, since I've only read page one, I'm not certain of the duties the alliances are to have.

For me, I figure I'm the only one who can decide what is good for me, and what isn't.

I read "For the New Intellectual" when I was 17. The phrase, "Check your premises" has stayed with me ever since 1961.

I believe she stated that AS A PREMISE". Remember she wrote in "For the New Intellectual":
"When a man, a business corporation or an entire society is approaching bankruptcy, there are two courses that those involved can follow: they can evade the reality of their situation, and act on a frantic, blind, range-of-the-moment expediency---not daring to look ahead, wishing no one would name the truth, yet desparately hoping that something will save them somehow---or they can identify the situation, check their premises, discover their hidden assets, and start rebuilding."

None of her characters who loved themselves, attempted suicide. She said, in "We the Living", concerning its autobiographical nature, that unlike Kira, she felt some "compromise" was necessary, as she needed to get out of what became the Soviet Union, in order to alert people around the globe of the very atrocity of Marxist/Leftist idiotology. Kira died attempting to leave Russia; Rand survived to write the story.

Ayn Rand stated explicitly that life is worth living, but did she realize that actually is a premise? If she had been unsuccessful in leaving the Soviet Union, would she have thought that life was not worth living? The number of her characters who attempted suicide suggests that she probably did realize that life being worth living actually was an assumption predicated on under what conditions one "lives".

This is part of why I started my company. If interested, send me a personal message.

Of course she did. That was the whole foundation of her philosophy.

A fairly good biography of Rand---I say fairly---is "Ayn Rand: The Russian Radical" by Chris Matthew Sciabarra, which highlights the philosophical nature of her schooling.

When you have your health, the challenges of life are much easier to respond to.
That's why the tyrants are attacking the health of everyone with drugs that impede the body's ability to thrive.
There are alternatives to the state's perverse vaccines.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/outpati...

Our health and our freedom are our responsibility to defend.