If they aren't otherwise terminal, I think it is abhorrent and unethical. You may well be correct, that the removal of the feeding tube is the initiating agent of demise in these "hundreds of times a day."
Thanks in part to your open dialoge, I'm starting to see that a substantial fraction of the population has a view of the value of life that is radically different from my view.
When you have an elderly relative who doctors say will never recover from a stroke and you know they didn't want to be hooked up to tubes for the rest of their lives, you honor those wishes. With or without a Living Will.
My freepmail and indeed the open forum is replete with families faced with making what is inarguably the most difficult decision of their lives.
I think to state that people have a radically different view of the value of life is to misunderstand that sometimes, the last thing we can do for a loved one is to honor their wishes.
To discuss instead the use of denial of food and hydration to honor those wishes is another thing. But a feeding tube is often all that is keeping a loved one alive. When people write their Living Wills, they need to be clear on that point. And if you wish to be kept alive on tubes or machinery indefinitely, you need to be clear to your family on that point as well.