X-Message-Number: 10030 Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 16:50:27 -0400 From: Paul Wakfer <> Subject: Re: CryoNet #10022 Will they need it when they want it? References: <> > Message #10022 > From: "Scott Badger" <> > Subject: Will they need it when they want it? > Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 08:42:20 -0500 > > Hi everyone, > > I've repeatedly heard it said that finding cures for all our diseases and > reversing the aging process will be much less of a challenge than repairing > the cellular damage brought about by the cryopreservation process. If so, > this begs the question; "Why would skeptics need cryonics by the time > they're willing to consider it?" If the skeptic survives to the time when > cryonics reliably *works*, and it's endorsed by celebrity scientists and the > media, then s/he probably won't need to be frozen since death and disease > will already have been conquered. Scott, you seem to completely missing the point that advanced technology capable of fixing old age and most disease conditions is only necessary for reviving patients frozen with the CURRENT HIGHLY DAMAGING procedures. Research efforts currently being pursued are almost certain, IMO, to produce fully reversible suspended animation long before that advanced technology is available (at least 100 years before, IMO). It is *that* result which perhaps 20+ years from now convince the establishment, celebrities and large numbers of people to elect suspended animation. Frankly, at that time, I do not believe that it will be called cryonics any longer, that the current organizations will play a significant role, or that it will be financed by life insurance. Elective suspended animation of terminal patients will be something very different. It will start before legal death (well before in the case of highly brain destructive diseases); it will be financed by *health* insurance (or HMOs); and it will be run by major corporations. > I can imagine that cryonics will continue > to be useful as an emergency procedure for accidental deaths (which will > also decline in the future) as well as some other relatively rare > circumstances, And this use of "cryonics" (with possibly the current organizations) will also continue after the perfection and implementation of fully reversible suspended animation. Doctors will make the same decisions re declaration of death that they do today. If the terminal patient it declared to be not likely *ever* fixable and/or not capable of being reversibly suspended (eg to badly decomposed or mangled), then he will be declared legally dead and turned over to a cryonics org. Under these circumstances, his likely to need to be pre-enrolled and having life insurance for financing as is currently the case. However, as you point out the percentage of cases where this happens will be a small and diminishing percentage as time goes on. > but the overall implication is that if cryonics must be shown > to work before people are convinced to sign up, then why do we think they > will flock to sign up once it does and they don't need it anymore? The last > thing I want to do is sound pessimistic here and I'm completely in favor of > further research, But you seem to misunderstand what this research will accomplish. While, if it is increases the credibility and size of cryonics, it will make the current patients far more *secure*, it will do absolutely nothing *directly* to hasten their revival. > Now, would someone please poke some holes in this hypothesis (like I had to > ask). I expect you will get several replies. -- Paul -- Voice/Fax: 416-968-6291 Page: 800-805-2870 The Institute for Neural Cryobiology - http://neurocryo.org Perfected cryopreservation of Central Nervous System tissue for neuroscience research and medical repair of brain diseases Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=10030