From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@www.aeiveos.com)
Date: Sun Oct 03 1999 - 11:21:39 MDT
This is another message that I sent to Chris, that may possibly of
general interest to the group. Chris's response indicated that he
was generally aware of my points and thought the idea was of some interest.
--------
On Sat, 2 Oct 1999, Chris Fedeli wrote:
> > > What do think of the current state of cryonics?
> > > Is there hope for reversible suspension even within twenty years?
>
> Brian Wowk, physicist at 21CM, went on the record with the prediction
> that reversible cryo-suspension of a brain would be accomplished in ten
> years. He said that on one of the videotapes that 21CM released
> detailing their research and business plan.
>
> Good to know that some of the older folks on this list will have
> something to fall back on :)
>
Chris, you need to rethink this unless we get progress on the legal
front. I was contacted by a person from Oregon a few days ago
about my perspective on aging research. During the discussion
I pointed out the problems that the illegality of pre-death
cryonic suspensions drives up both our health care costs *and*
effectively *kills* people. If people who are undergoing frequent
strokes or who have degenerative brain diseases are kept alive, there
may be nothing left to "reanimate" if you freeze them after they die.
The basic evolutionary biology of aging says that even when we lick
one problem there will be another problem waiting behind that. There
is a very good chance we will solve the organ transplant shortage
problem in the next 10 years. If so, we may end up with old bodies
but increasingly frail brains. I believe that natural neuronal
cell death (which is real, though not as severe as was thought
in the '50's & '60's), *will* catch up with you past 150 years.
If we do not develop ways of stopping Alzheimer's, Parkinson's,
neuronal cell death, etc. you will end up dead. Adding replacement
cells and/or stimulating neuronal stem cell division may be
stop-gap measures. The replacement cells will not help you
recover your former memories, education, etc. if the cells
that were holding that information died.
Now, the obvious solution to this is to suspend yourself around
age 70-100 (before you have lost a lot of function) and wait for
the technology to get much better.
Doing that requires a *significant* change in the legal environment.
I suggested to the person I spoke with, that after she investigated it
further, that Oregon might be an interesting place to put such
an innovative idea on the ballot. They have a history of being
very innovative in health care funding as well as things like
"the right to die" [or suspend]. You probably want to do it
after "The First Immortal" comes out as a movie.
Robert
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:05:23 MST