From: Michael M. Butler (butler@comp-lib.org)
Date: Thu Jul 11 2002 - 09:16:50 MDT
7/9/02 10:35:49 PM, Max More <max@maxmore.com> wrote:
>I don't see any information about possible rebroadcast, but here's the
>transcript:
>
>
>http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0207/09/cf.00.html
>
>BEGALA: Well, at baseball's all-star game tonight, there will be a special
>tribute to 18-time all-star Ted Williams, who died last week. Just think,
>though, if some people have their way at future all-star games, Teddy "Ball
>Game" may be back, along with that sweet swing that got him a .406 batting
>average in 1941.
>
>Williams' children are involved in a bizarre and angry battle over his
>corpse. His son reportedly had the body frozen in hopes that someday
>Williams' DNA could be sold and a lineup of little Teds could be cloned.
>His daughter is fighting to have her father's remains cremated.
>
>Fire and ice tonight in our CROSSFIRE. Our guests are Dr. Max More,
>president of the Extropy Institute and a member of Alcor Life Extension
>Foundation. He is in Los Angeles. And, in Charlottesville, Virginia,
>Jonathan Moreno, the director of the University of Virginia's Center for
>Bioethics.
>
>Thank you for joining us.
>
>(APPLAUSE)
>
>CARLSON: Dr. More, thank you for joining us. I have to admit, I didn't know
>a great deal about cryonics when I woke up this morning, but spent a little
>time on the worldwide Web, went to something called the Cryonics Institute
>and came across the following page.
>
>"In emergency cases," it says, "before proceeding any further, if the
>person has already died, cool his or her head immediately. Place ice cubes
>or crushed ice or water ice in a plastic bag and completely cover the
>front, top, back and sides of the person's head." It goes on to say, "click
>here if the person is not yet dead, and we can help you freeze the head."
>
>Now, you're a believer in cryonics. What -- if you're a believer, do you
>keep a -- I don't know, a soup tureen of liquid nitrogen in your house?
>What exactly are the methods you use to preserve a body as it dies?
>
>DR. MAX MORE, PRESIDENT, EXTROPY INSTITUTE: Well, first of all, I'm not a
>believer. I don't like to be a believer in anything. I think the cryonics
>gives some unknown chance of success. Nobody is actually promising that
>this will work.
>
>We have some reasonable evidence that brain cells can survive for some time
>after clinical death. That's not biological death. But we don't know the
>actual chances of being brought back. So I'm not believing in anything.
>
>All I believe is that it's probably a better chance if I'm suspended than
>if I'm thrown in the ground to rot or be burned in flames. Those don't give
>you any chance at all.
>
>(CROSSTALK)
>
>MORE: Go ahead.
>
>CARLSON: As I understand it, it's quite expensive? I mean, in some cases,
>over $100,000 to have your body or your head preserved.
>
>MORE: That's the new thing, because I've been doing this since I was in my
>early 20s, and I had no money as a student. And I did it with life
>insurance, which is how most people do it, which is a very small payment
>per month.
>
>CARLSON: Are you a body or a head man?
>
>MORE: I'm head only, at the moment. I'm head only right now. My view is
>that any technology that can repair the damage from the crystal formation
>could also regenerate the body relatively easily.
>
>BEGALA: So that means that when you're gone, they're going to chop your
>head off and freeze it in, like, a big Frigidaire, and the rest of you does
>go away, right? They'll burn it or bury it or whatever, right?
>
>MORE: That's true, although I think my own preference would be to preserve
>the rest of my body separately, or at least the spinal column, in case
>there's any useful information in there for revival purposes.
>
>BEGALA: But they might be more comfortable together. Wouldn't they want to
>kind of hang out together? They become attached for a while.
>
>MORE: I'll tell you what. If things improve, if the suspension procedures
>get better than they are today so there's really no cellular damage, then
>yes, I'll take my whole body, because it will be fairly easy to bring me back.
>
>But right now, there's no denying that tremendous damage is done by the
>freezing process itself, despite all the precautions taken. And to repair
>that kind of level of damage, we need an advanced molecular technology that
>would make regenerating a body relatively easy. And I say relatively easy.
>
>CARLSON: Mr. Moreno, this is obviously grotesque and ghoulish and kind of
>revolting. But what is morally wrong with it? You're an ethicist. Explain
>why this is a wrong thing.
>
>JONATHAN MORENO, DIRECTOR FOR BIOETHICS, UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA: You know,
>Tucker, the 50- or $100,000 to freeze the great Ted Williams' head would be
>better spent buying baseball equipment for kids in the inner city, or
>building them baseball parks.
>
>This is a medical science that doesn't even meet the silliness threshold.
>And it's really unfortunate that something like Ted Williams' memory is
>caught in this. The justice issue here also is, you know, there's something
>to the ancient wisdom that says we get our shot, we all get our shot at
>life, and then we move on so the next person can take our place.
>
>What if Tucker Carlson were around for 100 years? How many people sitting
>in your audience at GW wouldn't have a shot at your job?
>
>MORE: I'm shocked to hear that.
>
>BEGALA: That's the least of the worries about Tucker being around for
>another 100 years.
>
>MORE: I'm shocked by this idea that we should just dispose of people as
>soon as they keel over. Would you not give people resuscitation as their
>hearts stop temporarily? Or would you not give them chemotherapy to try to
>get over cancer?
>
>These people are not disposable. These are human beings who have a chance
>of coming back. If you're going to it's silly, I think you need to give a
>reason why so we can actually address the real arguments there.
>
>CARLSON: What about that, Mr. Moreno?
>
>MORENO: The problem is that this is all part of a culture that has totally
>lost track of the fact that life has an appropriate beginning, middle and end.
>
>MORE: Appropriate according to who?
>
>MORENO: I don't agree with Dr. More's view that this is simply an extension
>of other life-preserving techniques. There are times when it's appropriate
>to use those techniques. There are times when it's appropriate to use those
>techniques and medical care, and times when it's not.
>
>MORE: And who decides when it's appropriate?
>
>MORENO: Excuse me, sir, can I finish?
>
>MORE: Certainly.
>
>MORENO: So many people now are suffering in their last days and weeks of
>life, as are their families, because of inappropriate medical interventions.
>
>MORE: But this would remove...
>
>MORENO: Sir, I'm still talking. We've come to expect people to insist upon.
>And we are creating a very bizarre technology of death instead of a
>technology of life. And this is only the oddball limit of that kind of
>culture.
>
>MORE: Again, that's not an argument. And I would make the point that if we
>had good cryonic suspension available, then probably most people wouldn't
>want to suffer those last months, which are very expensive months, in
>hospitals. They'd rather be suspended under better conditions. That would
>greatly reduce the cost of medical care.
>
>MORENO: You have no medical or scientific argument, either. You've just
>said that someday it might be possible. Someday it might be possible to fly
>a cow to the moon without a spaceship.
>
>MORE: No, that's nonsense. That's nonsense. You're talking nonsense. Now
>you're being silly because you're making ridiculous arguments that
>contravenes physics.
>
>(CROSSTALK) MORE: I'd like to hear why he thinks that this contravenes
>physics or biology. Flying a cow to the moon without propulsion system does
>violate physics. Let's hear an argument, please.
>
>CARLSON: Well, let me provide an argument for you.
>
>MORE: It's very easy to make fun, isn't it? But give me an argument.
>
>CARLSON: I'll go right ahead and do that. I want to read you something from
>the Alcor Life Extension Foundation, of which apparently you're a member.
>This is from, again, the Web site.
>
>Here's a quote. "The possibility of living a longer, more productive life,
>even following the event we now refer to as death is becoming more
>realistic with each passing day."
>
>There is a kind of willful self-deception here. I mean, the fact is, people
>do die. We're not very close to eliminating death. There's really no hope
>at this point that mankind will ever be able to eliminate death. And this
>is sort of elaborate pretending, is it not?
>
>MORE: There's no hope, according to who? There are many eminent scientists
>these days who think there's a great deal of hope. We've already
>immortalized cells in culture. We've used (UNINTELLIGIBLE) extend the life
>of cells. We can regenerate a number of tissues.
>
>We're making advances on an enormous number of fronts. There's no reason to
>say that this is an impossible problem to cure. It's a technical problem
>and we will cure it in time.
>
>And in the meantime, this is the conservative thing to do, to preserve
>somebody in good condition to reach that possible technology. Otherwise
>they have no chance at all.
>
>BEGALA: Dr. More, I disagree with you. But you have a perfect right to
>waste your money and follow all these goofy enterprises. But in the case of
>Ted Williams, there's no indication I've seen in the public record that
>this was Mr. Williams' desire. This is, according to the news accounts I've
>seen, the desire of his son.
>
>In fact, as Mr. Moreno pointing out, Ted Williams, I know for a fact he
>spent a good deal of his life, most of his life, raising money for the
>Jimmy Fund, a cancer fund, that helped kids with cancer. And my guess is
>he'd probably rather have that money spent helping children alive today
>trying to fight cancer, than turning himself into a sideshow spectacle, the
>way it's become.
>
>So why should somebody else make the decision, in the case of Ted Williams?
>
>MORE: Well, I don't argue with that. I don't know the exact facts of this
>case. And we certainly can't trust the other side to give an accurate
>interpretation. But my view is really, it should be up to each person to
>decide if they want to be suspended. Nobody else should really decide that
>for them. Now, if he's paying for it, that's one thing. But if it's against
>his wishes, then no, that's not OK. So I don't disagree with that. But it
>should be our choice individually.
>
>CARLSON: OK. On that happy note, we're going to take a quick break. We'll
>be right back. Stay frozen to your chairs, heads and all. Our guests will
>be right back to consider this question. If Ted Williams can be frozen and
>unthawed, does that mean that people such as Richard Simmons, Bill
>O'Reilly, yes, Kathy Lee Gifford, can live forever too? We'll explore the
>ethical implications of cryonics -- and there are many.
>
>Later, President Bush's prescription for what's ailing Wall Street. Will
>business take its medicine?
>
>And our quote of the day. It's from a man who's been prone to exaggeration,
>outright falsehoods, in the past. There he goes again. We'll be right back.
>
>(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
>
>CARLSON: Welcome back to CROSSFIRE. We're talking about the implications of
>freezing and cloning famous people, cutting their heads off for future use.
>Today it's baseball legend Ted Williams. What if someday it's Bill Clinton?
>Ooh.
>
>In the CROSSFIRE tonight, from Los Angeles, Dr. Max More. He's the
>president of the Extropy Institute and a member of the Alcor Life Extension
>Foundation. And in Charlottesville, Virginia, there's Jonathan Moreno,
>who's the director of UVa's center for bioethics.
>
>BEGALA: Dr. More, let's talk about some of the -- I think, silly, absurd,
>but practical ramifications of your position. If such mythical technology
>ever takes place and we can revivify an 83-year- old Floridian like Ted
>Williams, what are we going to do with this army of 83-year-olds?
>
>Do they get back Social Security? Do they get their inheritance back that
>they left to their kids? Do they still qualify for rent control for all the
>years that they were in frozen suspension? What are the pragmatics of this?
>
>MORE: Those are all excellent questions. There are many issues. We have to
>sort of multi-track on this, and not think along one line. Don't just think
>of an 83-year-old person coming back, but really think about all the
>changes that are happening.
>
>That person to be brought back, first of all, they're not going to be
>revived until we've really cured the problem of aging, which is going to
>take some unknown amount of time. So they're not going to come back as an
>aged 83-year-old person. They'll come back with youthful vitality.
>
>Now, there is certainly a major issue of adjusting psychologically, and
>that's not going to be easy. I don't think anybody should pretend it will
>be easy. But, you know, I made a move from England to California, which is
>a pretty big culture shock. This will be bigger one, certainly. Many people
>won't want to do that.
>
>BEGALA: You're talking about human popsicles. I mean, England to L.A. may
>be a bit, but, I mean. So we're going to -- now, Ted Williams, when he
>passed, was 83. He had a bunch of physical maladies, but the body itself
>was 83.
>
>So we're not only going to bring him back, but -- like, at what point? Can
>we pick? Because '41 was his best season. He hit .406 and he was the
>greatest hitter to ever live. Can we bring him back just at that stage of
>his development?
>
>MORE: Well, if he did, he wouldn't be very good in comparison to the
>athletes of that time, I suspect, because the standards keep going up as we
>get better ways of training and diet and chemistry and so on. So I don't
>think that would be a very good idea. He's not going to be coming back and
>playing the same game, at that point.
>
>CARLSON: Mr. Moreno, one of the things that I'm -- one of the many things
>I'm bothered by in the story, is the idea that these companies take this
>money, then promise to keep these heads under ice for a thousand years,
>into perpetuity.
>
>I mean, everyone thought Enron was going to last forever. Of course, it
>didn't. Is there any government regulation of this? Or can you just become
>a freelance head-taker? Do you know, Mr. Moreno?
>
>MORENO: This is the wild, wild west, Tucker. There's no regulation. People
>can spend their money on foolish things if they want to. But there's so
>much more good that could be done.
>
>You know, there's a special irony in talking about cloning an all-star team
>of Ted Williams. He had such a great swing that people called him the
>natural. He hated that, because he had a great work ethic.
>
>And he used to say that he worked every swing that he got. Every ball that
>he hit, he worked very hard to hit. And...
>
>CARLSON: Back to the -- wait, I just want to make sure I understand this.
>There are laws against desecrating corpses.
>
>MORENO: Of course.
>
>CARLSON: And yet, anybody can just open a mom or pop head shop, basically,
>and the government can't do anything about it. Is that right?
>
>MORENO: That's right. I mean, this is one of the areas in which there is
>not regulation. There's also hardly any regulation at all on the other end
>of life, on in vitro fertilization, for example, which is why this whole
>business about human cloning has gotten to be such a hot topic.
>
>MORE: Well, there may be reasons for regulation and oversight. But of
>course, that would probably add legitimacy to this, which you probably
>wouldn't want to do. But let me ask you, if we had a procedure, some
>experimental procedure, that might help somebody to stay alive, but it was
>quite difficult to do and was expensive, would you tell them, sorry, but
>you're going to have to die because that's expensive. The money could have
>gone to the Boy Scouts or some other charity. Are you going to say that
>that person cannot use their money to die, that it's a silly attempt?
>
>(CROSSTALK)
>
>MORENO: Dr. More, I've said before, people can do silly things with their
>money. If they want to give it to companies like yours, that's fine with
>me. But I think people...
>
>(CROSSTALK)
>
>MORE: There's nothing silly about that.
>
>MORENO: People ought to think a little more deeply than you apparently
>have, about...
>
>MORE: I've thought about it very deeply, I can assure you.
>
>MORENO: That's not what I'm hearing tonight.
>
>MORE: Well, I haven't heard any arguments from you whatsoever. All you've
>given are some ridiculous kind of analogies with cows flying to the moon.
>Honestly, they're very poor kind of arguments.
>
>MORENO: Exactly what I read about...
>
>(CROSSTALK)
>
>MORE: Excuse me, but I'm talking right now. We've frozen many kinds of
>tissues. We've frozen skin, we've frozen 40 different kinds of tissue.
>We've revived those back. We're getting on towards doing whole organs.
>There's no reason to think that the information embodied in those cells is
>destroyed completely, if you suspend someone in good condition.
>
>So for you to say that's impossible, you're going to eat those words in the
>future. I'd actually like to make a bet with you, if you're willing to do
>that, off the show, for some large sum of money, whether this will be
>possible or not. Because I don't think you have good reasoning behind your
>position.
>
>MORENO: Sir, I believe that life has a course and a shape. And I don't want
>to be around to collect on that bet.
>
>(LAUGHTER)
>
>(CROSSTALK)
>
>BEGALA: The ethics, Mr. Moreno, of -- the news reports we've seen is that
>Ted Williams' son wants to freeze his father's corpse to sell the DNA to
>others. Now, if DNA, off, transferred hitting ability, then his son would
>have hit .406. And his son is a total loser. What are the ethics of selling
>off the DNA?
>
>MORENO: The ethics of selling off the DNA is, that's pretty much
>unregulated, too. But it's ridiculous. I mean, there's as likely to get me,
>which they definitely don't want on their team, as they are to get another
>star quality hitter as Ted Williams. Genetics is a lot more complicated
>than that.
>
>MORE: I agree.
>
>MORENO: You don't express a quality that simply, that directly.
>
>MORE: I agree, too. I think it's a ridiculous idea, if that's what's
>happening. But I don't know if that is what's happening, or just what one
>side of the family is saying. Certainly you cannot bring back that person
>with a DNA. A DNA is not a person. There's going to be a huge number of
>changes in the environment and the expression of those genes. So that would
>be a ridiculous idea.
>
>BEGALA: Dr. More, thank you very much. We'll have you back in 250 years.
>And, Mr. Moreno, thank you. We'll have you back during your natural life.
>
>(APPLAUSE)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:15:20 MST