X-Message-Number: 16501
Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2001 13:13:26 -0700 (PDT)
From: Scott Badger <>
Subject: Re: An argument for preserving frozen persons

David Pizer suggests that we might be able to extend
the anti-abortionists' argument that the zygote/fetus
"might" be a human to cryonics. But I can't really be
selective and use this argument for cryonics and not
also use it to support the anti-abortionist view, can
I? As I am definitely not an anti-abortionist, what to
do?

I could probably accept a set of criteria for
establishing just when I could reasonably conclude
that a mass of cells has become a human. I'm not sure
what those criteria would be but I would expect to see
a nervous system in place for one thing. Similarly, we
should be able to present a set of criteria such that
others could reasonably conclude that a frozen body
may still be a person capable of being re-animated.

I have a friend who is nurse. I recently forwarded
Mike Darwin's 3-part article on CPR. She became much
more interested in the idea of cryonics as a result,
saying that she found the actual mechanics of the
process very interesting. The more she learned about
suspension protocols, recent advances in
vitrification, etc, the more feasible it all seemed to
her. So it would seem that education might be the real
key to effectively persuading others to look into
cryonics.

Scott Badger

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 
a year!  http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=16501