X-Message-Number: 5667
From: Garret Smyth <>
Newsgroups: sci.cryonics
Subject: Re: Whole-Body vs. Neuro
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 96 02:02:38 GMT
Message-ID: <>
References: <4e2bjk$>

Edgar Swank:
> I would tend to agree that whole-body vs. neuro -probably- doesn't
> increase chances of revival significantly.

Well I don't agree. In terms of chances of revival, I expect neuro's to
have a *better* chance of revival. We have discussed at lenght that there
is nothin lost by going neuro that anyone seruiously considers to be part
of their identity (again I point out that no one considers Christopher Reeve
to be anyone other than Christopher Reeve despite his broken back). The
technology needed to revive anyone will be able to revive a neuro (we are
getting close to organ growth even now).

> But that said, it's still my opinion that whole-body is preferable for
> those who can comfortably afford it.
> 
> If nothing else, a whole-body will probably have some prestige value
> upon revival, especially for those who have interesting scars or
> tattoos, which will most probably be very rare both in those born in
> the future and cloned-body neuros.  About all the neuros will have to
> show will be their dental work.

Ah, yes. good point. You've got me here. All cryonics organisations should
at once change their literature and publicity. Neuro is okay as long as
you are ordinary, but you *must* go whole body if you are Lydia the Tatooed
Lady, or perhaps the Elephant Man.

>     "My, what's that?", she said.  "Oh, I got that scar in an auto
>     accident back in 1970."  "What, you didn't have automatic safety
>     systems?"  "Just a seat belt. That probably saved my life. But
>     that was before airbags and way before computerized guidance. Tens
>     of thousands were killed in auto accidents every year. It was just
>     a risk of living everyone accepted."  "Ohhh, how fascinating.
>     Let's go back to my place and you can tell me more about the old
>     days ..."

Edgar, just how do you start conversations at parties nowadays?
 
> Also, it occurs to me, having sex organs hundreds of years old might
> also have some appeal in some situations.

Game show host: "We asked one hundred people whether they prefer new fresh
juicy sex organs or ones that may look okay, but the owner keeps telling
you are hundreds of years old. How many went for the old sex organs?"

EdgarSwank: "100"

Host: "100? Our survey said..."

Computer: "Brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrp!" a big "X" shows on the display.

Host: "Sorry Edgar, our survey says that 100 % of people prefer fresh juicy
organs to ones 100s of years old! Never mind, you do get to take home the
self tatoo kit and the photograph album of fascinating scars, along with
the book "One Hundred and One Ways to pick up women talking about your
physical deformities".

Have a nice day!

Garret

-- 
Garret Smyth				An Alcor member (without tatoos)

Phone:  0181 789 1045 or +44 181 789 1045


Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=5667