PDA

View Full Version : Cryonics: The Chance to Come Back


Naughty Nigel
18th November 2016, 04:10 PM
A terminally ill teenager has won an historic ruling to have her body cryogenically preserved, in the hope that she can come back to life if her illness becomes curable in the future.

Terminally ill Teen wins historic ruling to preserve her body - BBC Report (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-38012267)

Whilst this is a desperately sad case for the young lady concerned I am not entirely sure that I would want to come back in hundreds of years time, or even ten years for that matter!

My parents have only been gone for about fifteen years, but I often wonder what they would make of the world if they came back today.

mack100
18th November 2016, 04:17 PM
We are probably a century or more away from perfecting the science of regenerative cryogenics, if ever.
Terribly sad for this brave young girl and those around her but I regard the state of commercial regenerative cryogenics as nothing short of a scam.

Jim Ford
18th November 2016, 04:40 PM
Alternatively:

"Man to be cryogenically preserved until ‘everything stops being ****’"

http://newsthump.com/2016/11/18/man-to-be-cryogenically-preserved-until-everything-stops-being-****/

and:

"Petition to have Michael Gove cryogenically frozen reaches 9 million"

http://newsthump.com/2016/11/18/petition-to-have-michael-gove-cryogenically-frozen-reaches-9-million/

I must admit that the news these days is so dire that Newsthump is my preferred news site. and I'm fully in sympathy with the first article!

Jim

Westy
18th November 2016, 05:07 PM
I suppose its one way to be around for the olympus EM1 mk24 borg implant. :)

skids
18th November 2016, 06:24 PM
Feel terribly sad for the young girl.

I think it's right the Judge went with her wishes regardless of the state of the science (and the possibility of related scams).

Who knows what may become possible in the future? If you had told an Encyclopaedia Britannica salesman in the 1950's that in less than 100 years time people would have access to 99.9% of the content on a handheld device for free he'd have looked at you like you had a ferret coming out of your head.

I doubt very much that the current freezing techniques would mean the young girl could be revived if the technology exists in the future but glad her wishes were met (and her family could afford it).

Don't think time travel will ever be 'a thing' otherwise some people from the future would have rocked up here (unless they are here and we haven't noticed).

Wee man
19th November 2016, 08:59 AM
Glad her wishes were met, gave those left behind a release in they had done all they could to follow her last wishes.
As things stand know one alive will know if any thing works out far into the future.
It is those who have only had their heads frozen I find strange.

On a side note go into my garden this morning and the service would be carried out for free.


Wee Man

MargaretR
19th November 2016, 10:48 AM
Ah, these idealistic people who get frozen, hoping to be revived in The Future .... even on the wild assumption it works, what makes them think The Future will be *remotely* interested in reviving a load of dinosaurs, who will have no current knowledge of anything, no skills relevant to future society, no means of support, and who will have to be looked after by the state and provided with basic life training at public expense...?

I mean would *we* be happy to do that for frozen people from (say) the Elizabethan era? Just because we could? (With the NHS in the state it's in already?!). :eek:

I think The Future will have its own problems to worry about, and won't care too much about idiots from The Past. *sarc

drmarkf
19th November 2016, 04:44 PM
I guess that particular equation must feel very different when you're a teenager who's whole future is being swept away. I'm sure we'd all have done the same at that age.

However, looking at the economic realities of this daft and hopeless ritual, devoting human endeavour to bringing back ill, old, megalomaniac rich people makes me feel faintly sick. Especially when we don't feed or give healthcare to so many in the world (and we could, right now). Please count me out.

Anyway, there's an old trope that 'there are more people alive now than there have ever been'. Actually, when you do the maths based on the best available science, since the evolution of Homo sapiens around 250000 years ago there have been around 15x as many as are currently alive, so that's another good reason for this not to catch on!

Zuiko
19th November 2016, 08:17 PM
I have nothing but sympathy for the poor girl and if this process gave her some comfort then no harm done.

However, it does strike me that for this process to have even the slightest chance of success, she would have needed to be frozen whilst still alive. Even if in the future a cure is discovered for her particular type of cancer, surely once you are dead you are dead?

Naughty Nigel
19th November 2016, 09:36 PM
I mean would *we* be happy to do that for frozen people from (say) the Elizabethan era? Just because we could? (With the NHS in the state it's in already?!). :eek:

I think The Future will have its own problems to worry about, and won't care too much about idiots from The Past. *sarc

There are a few people from the past that it would be fascinating to revive, (JS Bach for example), but I take your point.

The fact is that it is the 'idiots' of the present day and the past century that have created the mess we are all in now. :(

Andrew Riddell
20th November 2016, 12:54 AM
Without wishing to 'make a case' in any way, the judgement is available at http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Fam/2016/2859.html, and is worth reading in full.

Those who have commented on the scientific/technical aspects may be interested in para 67, which does not inspire confidence in such 'system' as may presently exist. I believe that the tabloid press are already on to this.

Andrew

drmarkf
20th November 2016, 09:39 AM
Yes, quite. Paras 30 and 31 are key as well.

Currently it sits with crystals, homeopathy and chiropractic.

I'd very much rather leave more of what may remain of my estate to my wife and children, or charities (or, actually, in tax so genuinely useful things can be done with it) than throw it away in some self-obsessed and credulous waste of human effort.

Jim Ford
20th November 2016, 11:15 AM
I agree with much that has been said (and somewhat regret my rather flippant post earlier).

If it meant any easing of fear of dying, I would find it very difficult to withhold the slightest grain of hope offered by freezing if one of my daughters was in a similar situation, in spite of the cost and even though I would suspect that it would not be at all effective.

When my eldest daughter was ten she had a hamster. Hamsters live for about 18 months maximum. At over a year old the hamster became ill and we had to take it to a vet. The vet diagnosed a tumour in its uterus and said that it could be removed with a hysterectomy. The operation would cost 40, which 30 years ago was a considerable sum. We could have said that it wasn't worth it as we could get another for 5, and even if the operation was successful the hamster was unlikely the live more than a few months.

There was no discussion, my wife and I knew how fond of the hamster my daughter was, and we agreed to the operation. The operation was successful, but the hamster died of old age a few months later, but my wife and I knew that we had made the right decision.

As a postscript, my daughter put a wooden gravestone over the burial spot with the statement that the hamster was a "loyal and faithful friend". I said to my wife that it had no choice but to be loyal and faithful - it was kept in a cage all its life!

Jim

Ricoh
20th November 2016, 05:33 PM
However, it does strike me that for this process to have even the slightest chance of success, she would have needed to be frozen whilst still alive. Even if in the future a cure is discovered for her particular type of cancer, surely once you are dead you are dead?

Freezing whilst alive would obviously kill you, but I see your point. Like freeze drying peas to keep the freshness!

Best hope would be to take a cell, extract the nucleus and do a dolly the sheep thing using a donor, plus a surrogate.

Jim Ford
20th November 2016, 07:22 PM
Best hope would be to take a cell, extract the nucleus and do a dolly the sheep thing using a donor, plus a surrogate.

But it wouldn't be the same if you couldn't restore the memories and intellect, which define the individual.

Jim

Ricoh
20th November 2016, 08:37 PM
But it wouldn't be the same if you couldn't restore the memories and intellect, which define the individual.

Jim
Well, it's the difference between science fiction and scientific fact.
It's the human physic causing some not to accept death, inventing life after to deal with our finite mortality.

DerekW
20th November 2016, 09:03 PM
The belief in cryogenics is on the same order as a religion based belief in a heaven.
If it helps do not knock it.

Ricoh
20th November 2016, 09:33 PM
I have no issues with people believing in the life after, it's when it's force fed, as it was for me in primary education, that I strongly object to.

Naughty Nigel
20th November 2016, 11:03 PM
But it wouldn't be the same if you couldn't restore the memories and intellect, which define the individual.

Jim

I fully agree.

I don't wish to sound callous, but even if the technology existed, would there be any point in reviving a human being who presumably has some kind of faulty gene which may well be life limiting in other ways?

I can fully understand how the young lady felt, but as her father pointed out in court, if she was revived in (say) 200 years, none of the family members would be around to support her, and she would know nobody.

Surely, one of the greatest wrenches of death is the people we leave behind? Once they have gone there is little to come back for.

Ricoh
21st November 2016, 12:00 AM
Total waste of precious energy and money to supercool something the size of human body. Who's paying for it I'd like to know.

Naughty Nigel
21st November 2016, 02:31 PM
Total waste of precious energy and money to supercool something the size of human body. Who's paying for it I'd like to know.

A charity I believe. The girl's mother was unable to pay for it. The girl's father only agreed to the procedure on the understanding that he would have no financial liability at any point.

Ricoh
21st November 2016, 07:16 PM
Like to know the name of the 'charity'! Since there are so many asking for donations it would help knowing so I can make an informed decision for future donations.

Naughty Nigel
21st November 2016, 08:03 PM
Having now read the Extract from Judgement (http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Fam/2016/2859.html) I should like to clarify two points:

Firstly, it seems the girl's maternal grandparents have raised the necessary funds for the cryogenic preservation.

This matter is dealt with in paragraph 8 of the Extract from Judgement (http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Fam/2016/2859.html) as set out below:

8.Since the first cryonic preservation in the 1960s, the process has been performed on very few individuals, numbering in the low hundreds. There are apparently two commercial organisations in the United States and one in Russia. The costs are high, or very high, depending on the level of research into the subject's case that is promised. The most basic arrangement (which has been chosen here) simply involves the freezing of the body in perpetuity. Even that will cost in the region of 37,000, according to the evidence in this case about ten times as much as an average funeral. Although JS's family is not well-off, her maternal grandparents have raised the necessary funds.

Secondly, I may have been wrong to mention a charity per se.

The judgement does not specify any particular charity, but does, in paragraph 12 mention (I quote) "a voluntary non-profit organisation of cryonics enthusiasts, who are not medically trained."

The full paragraph is provided here for context:

"12.Cryonic preservation, whether or not it is scientifically valid, requires complex arrangements involving the participation of third parties. The body must be prepared within a very short time of death, ideally within minutes and at most within a few hours. Arrangements then have to be made for it to be transported by a registered funeral director to the premises in the United States where it is to be stored. These bridging arrangements are offered in the UK for payment by a voluntary non-profit organisation of cryonics enthusiasts, who are not medically trained. Evidently, where the subject dies in hospital, the cooperation of the hospital is necessary if the body is to be prepared by the volunteers. This situation gives rise to serious legal and ethical issues for the hospital trust, which has to act within the law and has duties to its other patients and to its staff."

I hope this helps to clear up any misunderstandings.

pandora
21st November 2016, 09:45 PM
Regenerative cryogenics, heaven forbid. Overpopulation, ultimate famine, cataclysmic seismic events, nuclear annihilation - all quite probable by 2020, why ever would you want to return to this loonie bin anyway. I'm opting to either stay dead or reincarnate to a saner world.

pandora
21st November 2016, 09:46 PM
As a multi billionaire would be nice *glasses

Ricoh
22nd November 2016, 08:33 AM
Best to donate one's body to medical research/training - save those funeral fees.

Ricoh
22nd November 2016, 08:37 AM
Eventually, most of our molecules will be reused/recycled, so multiple new lives. Heaven knows who's molecules I'm currently borrowing.

Harold Gough
22nd November 2016, 10:46 AM
Best to donate one's body to medical research/training - save those funeral fees.

Nice try but I think there is always a funeral.

Harold

Harold Gough
22nd November 2016, 10:57 AM
As a multi billionaire would be nice *glasses

If you had anything worth inheriting, those who were looking forward to receiving it might just pull the plug. With you being dead already, would any crime have been comitted? Maybe criminal damage?

Harold

Harold Gough
22nd November 2016, 11:22 AM
There is an interesting legal technicality.

Suppose you are having a great and successful life but an incurable illness brings it to an early end. Having arranged to be frozen, one day you are revived and cured.

You then discover that, in the interim, "enemies" have defamed you severely. As only the living can take action i.e. sue, you would wake up as, possibly, a hated and reviled person because of the lies told about you. If you have outlived your defamers...

Harold

Naughty Nigel
22nd November 2016, 01:04 PM
Eventually, most of our molecules will be reused/recycled, so multiple new lives. Heaven knows who's molecules I'm currently borrowing.

Or eating and drinking? :D

Ricoh
22nd November 2016, 01:11 PM
Isn't it in London where you drink your own urine at least twice a week, whether you want or not. Another pint landlord, and plenty of body!

Naughty Nigel
22nd November 2016, 01:14 PM
Isn't it in London where you drink your own urine at least twice a week, whether you want or not. Another pint landlord, and plenty of body!

What ever happened to Watneys? :D

Ricoh
22nd November 2016, 01:16 PM
Fullers was the drink of choice when I lived in London it certainly tasted like pi$$

Jim Ford
23rd November 2016, 11:11 AM
Eventually, most of our molecules will be reused/recycled, so multiple new lives. Heaven knows who's molecules I'm currently borrowing.

"Imperious Caesar dead and turned to clay, shall stop a hole to turn the wind away."

Or a bit like that!

Jim

Harold Gough
23rd November 2016, 11:31 AM
What ever happened to Watneys? :D

In the 1970s, the social club bar where my wife worked arranged a "Bad Beer Evening". The only beers available were Watney's Red Barrel and Harp Lager.

My local is a Fullers pub and the beers are looked after and excellent. Most of the regulars will drink only London Pride.

Harold

DerekW
23rd November 2016, 12:56 PM
Fullers killed our local brewery and then discontinued some of our favourites.