X-Message-Number: 26015
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 11:18:07 -0600
From: anthony <>
Subject: reanimation/revival

Preservation is a last resort to resuscitation. Once a sufficient level 
of assurance can be had that each patients' cause of death can be 
reversed, there wouldn't be much point in keeping them suspended.

But that assurance may well require a great deal of experimental and 
clinical work. Who will provide their preserved bodies as test subjects 
for this work and accept the risks involved? So far I'm assuming the 
subjects who have been preserved wish to be revived, not experimented 
on. In pharmaceutical development there are "phases" of regulatory/legal 
test. I assume surgical or other medical techniques/technology may 
require similar phases of testing(?), or at least comparable numbers of 
test subjects (rarity of the disease permitting).

"Phase 0" involves pure research: computer modeling, animal testing etc.

Phase I trials are clinical trials involving small groups of patients to 
evaluate human safety (they may not even be ill - to guage 
effects/toxicity in healthy humans). (20+ people)

Phases II->III increasing numbers of patients are given the drug to 
evaluate its efficacy. (>100 people)

Phases III->IV is the passing into commercial distribution of a drug 
(Phase IV refers to safety monitoring after the drug hits the shelves). 
(1000+s of patients)

Seeing as the drug administration bodies in the US and Europe demand 
proof of a drug's efficacy and safety based on trials involving
thousands of subjects I do not find it that surprising that a medical
procedure such as cryonics is not widely recognised by the medical
profession. It's efficacy in terms of saving lives is at present a
wholly imaginary number!

Any thoughts?


Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=26015