X-Message-Number: 4260
From:  (Brian Wowk)
Newsgroups: sci.cryonics
Subject: Re: Is Cyronics a Good Thing To Spend Money On ?
Date: 19 Apr 1995 18:40:10 GMT
Message-ID: <3n3leb$>
References: <> <3n1u1r$>

In <3n1u1r$>  (Jim0123) writes:

>     There *is* no possible rebuttal ... because I am *right* -
>     'cyronics' simply DOES NOT WORK with the technology
>     availible today. 

	Saying cryonics does not work today is an oxymoron.  Cryonics
is *defined* as preservation of patients for treatment by *future*
technology.  Molecular nanotechnology researcher Ralph Merkle 
describes the cryonics experiment as follows (paraphrasing):

	Take one group of terminal patients, and cryopreserve them
	when their heart stops.  Take another group, and bury them
	when their heart stops (the control group).  Wait 200 years.
	Compare how much of the memory and personality of patients
	in each group can be recovered with advanced nanotechnology.

Cryonics is a long-term experiment, and no one can say that it has
failed until the experiment is FINISHED.  How is the experiment
going so far?  The cryopreserved group is badly injured, but stable.
The worst-case outcome expected based on present knowledge is a
amnesiac clone of the original patient, with perhaps some basic
personality traits encoded in neural connectivity.  
The control group, well... they're not looking good at all.
Worst-case outcome: Not even any DNA left.  The question you must
ask yourself is: Do you want to be part of the experiment or
control group?


>     Are prospective new clients informed that
>     they are NOT going to survive the procedure, but instead
>     are just high-priced experimental animals ? 

	The signup paperwork of the two organizations I am most
familiar with (CryoCare and Alcor) both contain a lengthy
list of all known injuries associated with present cryopreservation
procedures, and possible adverse social consequences (should
revival ever be possible).  Nobody ever signs up for cryonics
without being fully aware that it is a *highly speculative*
procedure.

	As to your comment that relatives should be given
refunds: What I do with *my* money is none of my relatives
damn business.


>     Face it,
>     *improving* is not the same thing as *perfected* and
>     anything deviating even a fraction from perfection will
>     not produce the desired results. It will be a LONG time 
>     before a long-term storage technology is perfected, 
>     a very long time. 

	If you believe that no one will ever be restored to
health unless they are preserved with a *perfect* procedure
up front, then there is no point in continuing this discussion.
That's like saying nobody can ever survive an automobile
accident unless they suffer no injuries in the accident.
People can and do recover (even perfectly recover) from
some serious injuries.  As medicine advances, the severity
of injuries from which patients can recover will increase
dramatically.

 
>     As for holding out the hope that some truely generous folk
>     in the far future will both (a) perserve all the bodies and 
>     (b) repair even the nastiest cases of Norge-itis [for free
>     we assume] ... well, P.T. Barnum would have been proud.

	Cryonics patients will not be maintained and revived by the
"generous folks of the far future".  They will be maintained and
revived by the *cryonics organizations* that already exist today,
and that will be perpetuated across generations by the people
inspired by this powerful idea.  This has already been going
on for 30 years, and will continue for many decades more,
gaining momentum along the way.

	As to P.T. Barnum, well time will tell who the greater
fool is, won't it?

---Brian Wowk


Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=4260