X-Message-Number: 9851 Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 13:32:52 -0400 From: Saul Kent <> Subject: Time And Money In response to my concerns about the costs of reanimation, both Thomas Donaldson (9841) and Mike Perry (9848) argue that, if the cost of reanimating a particular patient is too high at a particular time in the future, the solution will be to continue to maintain that patient in suspension until the costs become affordable. As Thomas puts it: "As an outer limit (and I think it will become 'simple' long before that) I find it quite impossible to believe that in the year 3000 (Christian era) IF we learn how to revive people at all, it will not look like the simplest of tasks. Something you give to a youngster (not that there will be many youngsters around) as a minor exercise in medicine." I agree, in general, that the further into the future we go, the less expensive it is likely to be to reanimate cryonics patients. It's also true, of course, that once a patient is frozen, it becomes possible to maintain that patient for an indefinite period of time, for thousands of years, if necessary. It's also true, however, that the longer a patient has to be maintained in suspension, the greater the chances of that patient being taken *out* of suspension for one reason or another. We're all familiar with the phrase "time is money"; well, in the case of cryonics, "time is risk" as well. Thomas asks what I mean when I say that, even if we cannot "validly" estimate the price of reanimation, we should still try to do so. What I mean, Thomas, is that I think the cryonics societies should recognize and disclose that there *will* be costs associated with reanimation, that they should discuss the issue as best and as honestly as they can in their promotional efforts, that they should give their views as to how they expect to deal with these costs, and that they should make it clear that it is in the interests of members to provide money for these costs. Members will then have the opportunity of comparing the position of different organizations on this issue, and will have more information and opinions to rely on in assessing whether they think they have set aside enough money (and other assets) to cover *all* the costs of cryonics. Like it or not, the costs of cryonics and its affordability are likely to become bigger and more controversial issues than they are today in the relatively near future. Improved cryonics methods will cost more. Improved cryonics methods will make it easier to estimate the costs of (and timeable for) reanimation. Improved cryonics methods will motivate some people to be more concerned about the costs of reanimation. Success in any area inevitably bring problems with it, and cryonics will be no exception to this rule. The reason I'm looking forward to (what I believe) will be some of these problems is that I think that dealing with them will be a requisite for our ultimate success...the chance for continued life (and health) into the distant future. In short, the problems of success, as I see it, are far better (and more challenging) than the problems of failure. Certainly, estimating the costs of reanimation is likely to be one of our most challenging problems. ---Saul Kent Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=9851