X-Message-Number: 5619 Newsgroups: sci.cryonics From: (Brad Templeton) Subject: Re: Don't talk about neurosuspension Date: Sun, 14 Jan 1996 20:44:47 GMT Message-ID: <> References: <> <> I'm not saying deny Neuro. I'm saying express it as, in a slightly equivocal way, what it actually is. It *is* a cost saving measure. There's lots of information about your life, how you looked, what your motor skills were in your body that's not in your brain or even in your DNA. Yes, there's also information about how you decayed as you got old. If cost were not an object, *of course* you would keep the body for its information content, so long as keeping the body didn't hurt the best suspension of the brain. You might very well intend to throw away the body after scanning it for information and grow a new one based on that info. Or who knows, perhaps the fashion will be to look mature but feel young, and you will want the exact look of your body. Point is we have no idea about what tastes will be like after revival, and, if it weren't for cost issues, throwing away useful information is dumb. So it is a cost saving measure. With new femoral based perfusion and flush-out techniques, it may not hurt the brain suspension either. But at worst case, if you were Bill Gates, you would have their cut your head off your body and have them preserve both. -- Brad Templeton, publisher, ClariNet Communications Corp. The net's #1 E-Newspaper (1,160,000 paid sbscrbrs.) http://www.clari.net/brad/ Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=5619