X-Message-Number: 15650
From: "Gary Tripp" <>
Subject: voluntary deanimation
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 13:44:13 -0500

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C09755.620234E0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"

Phil Rhodes writes:

The whole of human history has been a continuous struggle to liberate 
people from the imposed theology/opression of others, you seem to be saying 
"I don't think people should be able to do this therefore I want to stop 
them from being able to".

Phil, you've misconstrued my intentions.

I still think that it's bad counsel because we can never draw 
the line precisely. I am not religious and I AM certainly an ADVOCATE
of complete FREEDOM of choice but I worry that some people with 
chronic conditions might choose to end it all on the false assumption 
that they have a guaranteed reanimation from cryonic suspension.

What I'm advocating here is that we frame the discussion in a more realistic
light and take into account their odds of successful reanimation. Some 
people with debilitating chronic conditions are not emotionally equipped to
analyze these issues in a rational manner. For these people it makes sense

to cut out all of the unhealthy elements of their life style in the hope that 
they
can improve their chances as suspension technology evolves.

I recall a case many years ago of a mathematician who had a brain tumour and

wanted to deanimate for the purpose of cryonic suspension. This man is alive 
today.

Given the rate of progress in suspension technology I would say he's in a far 
better 
position today.


Freedom of choice is basic and not an issue. However, a realistic discussion of 
our 

prospects IS at issue. This issue cannot be fully resolved unless we SPEND THE 
BUCKS
to do the necessary cryonics RESEARCH. 

/gary

------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C09755.620234E0

 Content-Type: text/html;

[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=15650