X-Message-Number: 13319
From: "George Smith" <>
References: <>
Subject: Minor (but important) clarifications, respectfully offered.
Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2000 11:22:43 -0800

Minor clarifications interspersed below:

In Message #13310 Thomas Donaldson wrote on Subject: so just how much
information does a suspension lose?
>
> Hi everyone!
>
> The problem with claiming that suspension works like a cipher or a code is
> simply that it may lose information. If it loses too much, the person
> suspended cannot be recovered.

The above sentence is stated as fact.  It is actually only an opinion.

> While I have stated repeatedly that electron micrographs do not come
> near to giving all the information which might be obtained from a
> suspended brain. Moreover, much other information may be inferred simply
> from the fact that the suspendee had a human brain, the issue of whether
> or not there will be ENOUGH information for revival remains open.
> Moreover, given that over the history of cryonics there have been many
> different attempts at suspension, it's quite possible that the answer to
> this question will vary with the particular treatments given a particular
> suspendee. Nobody will be able to make any kind of universal statement.
>
The above sentence is stated as fact.  It is actually only an opinion.

> Without further research devoted quite specifically to the question of
> just how we can recover information from the brains of suspendees treated,
> say, from 1995 to 2000, it's quite impossible to make any firm statements.
> I am optimistic, but that comes from my sense that electron micrographs
> tell only a small part of the story about a particular brain --- even if
> we could without destruction take such micrographs of every level of the
> whole brain.
>
> But there is a second issue here: our resources are presently
> relatively small, and the best use of them right now is to find ways to
> IMPROVE OUR PRESENT SUSPENSIONS.

The above sentence is stated as fact.  It is actually only an opinion.

 If we work at it, we may even make the
> issue of whether or not the needed information is preserved one which
> holds only for past suspensions, not present ones, for which we will KNOW
> it has been performed. It is after we find out how to save our own lives
> that it becomes appropriate to work on saving the lives of those who went
> before us. (Yes, if we had enough resources, we could work on both, but
> we may not even have enough resources to help OURSELVES).
>
> That is what I have to say on this issue. If extropians or anyone first
> works out how to successfully suspend the brains of those now living, then
> they can go on from their. Otherwise they are dealing only with a novel
> version of religion.

The above sentence is stated as fact.  It is actually only an opinion.

> Best and long long life to all,
>
> Thomas Donaldson

And in Message #13313, Joshua Kane wrote on Subject: Nanotech

> You know what?  I'm sick of nanotechnology being a buzzword in
> cryonics.  Yes, maybe it can repair the freezing damage, but medical
> science has saved people who have fallen in below-freezing water.  I'm
> sure it could also save brains that have been frozen in liquid
> nitrogen.  We must not wait until nanotechnology is developed.  We must
> try to do it without nanotechnology first!

The above sentence is stated as fact.  It is actually only an opinion.

> And another thing.  Scientists seem to be forgetting to do what they
> always do when there is a new medical branch: Try it on mice and rats
> first!

<end of posts quoted>

It is all too easy to proclaim our opinions as facts.

If you catch me doing so in the future, please correct me as well.

George Smith
www.cryonics.org

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=13319