X-Message-Number: 4238 From: (Brian Wowk) Newsgroups: sci.cryonics Subject: Re: Cyroprotective Proteins ? Date: 17 Apr 1995 20:07:34 GMT Message-ID: <3muhq6$> References: <3mjmoj$> <3mndc2$> In <3mndc2$> (Jim0123) writes: > You make an issue of the various metabolic processes which > terminate at distinct temperatures. However, is this a > problem if the body is chilled very quickly - say via an > external blood-chiller which could perfuse the body with > near-freezing plasma within minutes ? Which, if any, > metabolic reactions are still going on at -5C ... or maybe > -15c if freezing-inhibitors are used ? I am not an expert in cryobiology, so I will simply say this: Millions of dollars have been spent trying to solve this problem for transplantation purposes over the last twenty odd years. The best solutions found were flush-and-store on ice near 0'C, and most recently vitrification at -130'C. High- subzero "hibernation" is a no-mans land, fraught with problems not likely to be solved for decades. Finally, if you think cryonics is expensive now (3$ a day for whole-body storage) wait till you see how much active hibernation will cost (hint: think hospital ICU). >> The basic approach used by cryonics and transplant >>medicine for hypothermic storage is blood substitution. Blood >>is replaced by a special perfusate that is designed to >>minimize metabolic imbalances at low temperatures. > "Special perfusate" ... ? UW Solution (developed by Belzer and Southard at the University of Wisconsin, and sold under the trade name Viaspan by DuPont) has been used by both transplant surgeons and cryonics technicians for hypothermic transport since about 1990. A couple of cryonics firms, BioPreservation, Inc. and I believe Trans Time, Inc. also have their own proprietary perfusates. > You seem to imagine that there will be a large supply of > brainless bodies to transplant these brains into. For > such things to be, we are talking REALLY long-term > here - and there are just too many things which can > go wrong. Better concentrate on whole bodies ... > assuming anyone has the time, resources or interest > in reviving the frozen, don't burden them with having > to provide whole bodies also. The technology to grow whole bodies (without a brain) starting from a single cell is already demonstrated in nature (anencephalic babies). It is not hard to imagine that in 2095 artificial wombs will exist within which new bodies will grow around the brains of patients who suffer severe traumatic injuries. This is just one small subset of the kind of technology that will exist once genetic control of growth and development is understood. Think of it as the culmination of research into nerve and limb regeneration that is already underway today. The concerns you raise (long-time course, things that can go wrong, burdenning people, etc.) are arguments for neuropreservation, not against it. Needless to say, it also costs a lot less than whole-body preservation. > In the meanwhile, you speak of vitrification. Have these > organs been VIABLE once thawed ? Yes, for kidneys. The technology, originally developed by the Red Cross, is now owned by a biotech company called Organ, Inc. It is now jumping through various technical and FDA hoops to get it to market. > I just don't think cyronics is *real* ... and it won't be real > for quite a number of years to come. The technical issues > seem quite formidible, but they pale in comparison to > the issues of time and expense. Who's to say that a new > religion won't take root which requires the cremation > of all bodies - to 'liberate their souls' or some such > theological tripe ? As things are, cyronics has only two > redeeming features (a) it keeps research moving forward > and (b) a 0.00001% chance of revival is better than 0.0% > any day. > --Jim Cryonics is real, people are really doing it. The oldest cryonics patient has been in continuous cryopreservation for almost 30 years (under the care of several organizations, some now failed). 30 years is a long time-- perhaps 20% of the total distance this patient must travel to reach the medicine he needs. Yes, people and organizations are evanescent. But the *idea* of cryonics is here to stay. More than any individual people, it is the *idea*-- passed from generation to generation to generation --that will keep cryonics (and cryonics patients) going into the future. Cryonics is not about odds, or faith in people of the future. It is about the work we do right here, right now, today. This work impacts the chances of cryonics working so much, that the very idea of "odds" is undefined in this context. Brian Wowk Director, CryoCare Foundation P.S. Jim, I could not help but notice how "19th Century" your comments were in your other recent cryonics post. Have you read anything at all about molecular nanotechnology? Corporations, Universities, and Governments are starting to take this emerging technology seriously in their long-term planning. Maybe you should too before making bold pronouncements about the absolute irreversibility of freezing injuries. Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=4238