What you are preaching is collectivism/socialism.
You said:
“Lots of science involving humans would advance more rapidly if experimentation on humans were allowed.”
You seem to be in favor of sacrificing an individual for the advancement of science(”the common good”). That’s collectivism. What your statement said to me was that humans should be experimented on like “scientists” experiment on monkeys or rats now. And the reason your statement means that is that now some people can volunteer for some experiments. So you want more advancement ( “the common good”) so that means that you may want people to be forced into being experimented on like animals. But then people would lose their rights in the bill of rights and constitution and we would be a totalitarian state. So people would be slaves then.Slaves do not advance science. Slaves only follow orders to stay alive and do not innovate.
You wish to put in place laws that kill people for not being productive or for being drafted into experiments. That would make people slaves . And slaves do not advance science and do not innovate. It’s those laws that you want and many others want (for other “good” reasons) to put in place that make people slaves that take away freedom . Freedom and human rights are needed for capitalism and innovation and rapid advancement of science to happen. This is why America became the greatest nation that advanced technology and science more than any other nation in history , because of the freedom,liberty and rights granted to the American people in the constitution and the bill of rights.
You must get lots of exercise. All that jumping to conclusions.
You will have to look pretty hard to find any indication that I am in favor of such things, as of course I am not, as can be seen if you read my various posts on this thread.
Capitalism would be more productive if less-productive members of society were regularly removed. Science would be able to advance the bounds of knowledge more quickly if there were no ethical or legal restrictions on what scientists could do.
So what?
My whole point was that pursuit of knowledge (science) or increase of wealth (capitalism) are not the supreme values. They are amoral tools that are really good only insofar as they promote the real, human values.
I posted this because I believe people often start to think of science and capitalism and other means to a desirable end as being themselves ends that should be pursued almost regardless of anything else.
Knowledge and wealth are good things, but they are NOT the most important things.