The word “People” is not a name

Yes, people pass away every day. But they also have the opportunity to live on if we decide as a society to assign value to the names of individuals instead of numbing ourselves to the inevitable tragedy of life (in direct contrast to the perceived tragedy of our phone dying on us without a charger present). Nowadays, we undervalue things that don’t cost a single dollar, like our family, important relationships, and, most importantly, our health. I’m not speaking of perceived health (which is typically defined by the way we look) but of evaluating primary metrics of health like our glucose, blood pressure, and oxidative stress markers. While I am over-simplifying the metrics of health for brevity, it is important to note that small observations of important metabolic markers can have a big impact on the quality of one’s life. Just as observation and respect of individuals can have a big impact on the quality of society. Optimizing health from an internal perspective allows us to have mental agility that can lead to mental stability with best practices. This approach to life is often hard to execute but very easy to talk about. In modern media, it is a lucrative business model because no one has to have direct answers for anything. Instead of treating us like the unique genomes we all are, popular thinking says that everybody is a concept. This leads to conflicting information about protein, sugar magnesium, salt, carbohydrates, blood pressure, oil, effective exercise, longevity, vitamin D, etc. In turn, this ignorance has led (and will continue to lead) to a level of mental illness expressed in the eruption of violence we have seen in the past 20 years. To be immutable, this violence and inequality is nothing compared to 100 or even 1000 years ago, which is why the comparison model is flawed. One of the major and most important flaws of the comparison model is that it allows those of us living in the modern world to draw false equivalency as opposed to contrasting the different time periods by incorporating context. Context allows balance as well as an accurate baseline to measure against. The 21st century is a very different century because human beings are not just in the act of being like we once were. We are now looking to be greater than ourselves. That is not a bad thing, but without clarity from context and accurate education, it can become a confusing one. While quantum computers will allow us to exceed our being, we must not lose sight of sight itself by convoluting the concept of life through AI. All things can be helpful with a healthy mindset and empathic goals. One of those goals needs to be recognizing the names of people that are no longer with us as the individuals they were — along with their contributions, as we all contribute on some level to something. Pragmatically speaking, each and every one of us matters to get where we’re going collectively. We, therefore, cannot sacrifice the value of individuals in the pursuit of what humanity hopes to achieve next. Those that leave us on this earth have a name. Their name should be respected at every juncture so that we can shed appropriate light on the many contributors to our society as a whole and in part.