X-Message-Number: 15650 From: "Gary Tripp" <> Subject: voluntary deanimation Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 13:44:13 -0500 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C09755.620234E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Phil Rhodes writes: The whole of human history has been a continuous struggle to liberate people from the imposed theology/opression of others, you seem to be saying "I don't think people should be able to do this therefore I want to stop them from being able to". Phil, you've misconstrued my intentions. I still think that it's bad counsel because we can never draw the line precisely. I am not religious and I AM certainly an ADVOCATE of complete FREEDOM of choice but I worry that some people with chronic conditions might choose to end it all on the false assumption that they have a guaranteed reanimation from cryonic suspension. What I'm advocating here is that we frame the discussion in a more realistic light and take into account their odds of successful reanimation. Some people with debilitating chronic conditions are not emotionally equipped to analyze these issues in a rational manner. For these people it makes sense to cut out all of the unhealthy elements of their life style in the hope that they can improve their chances as suspension technology evolves. I recall a case many years ago of a mathematician who had a brain tumour and wanted to deanimate for the purpose of cryonic suspension. This man is alive today. Given the rate of progress in suspension technology I would say he's in a far better position today. Freedom of choice is basic and not an issue. However, a realistic discussion of our prospects IS at issue. This issue cannot be fully resolved unless we SPEND THE BUCKS to do the necessary cryonics RESEARCH. /gary ------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C09755.620234E0 Content-Type: text/html; [ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=15650