But the fact that he lives a full span of life is evidence that he is not in fact destroying himself. Money obtained by fraud will pay for just as much food or medical service as money obtained honestly. The problem is that Rand is drawing an absolute conclusion that her argument does not justify. Different opportunities to defraud people have different risks of detection, and victims vary in their ability to retaliate against fraud if they detect it. Using force against someone reduces his ability to use his reason to preserve his life.
Reality implies that the victim is less likely to have a long and healthy life.
I await responses from those who believe that Rand's argument is correct.