X-Message-Number: 29653 From: "John de Rivaz" <> Subject: 20 more years? Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 14:55:03 +0100 On http://www.positivefuturist.com/archive/185.html it is suggested that all you need do to live indefinitely is to survive the next 20 years. That is very nice, but I wonder if it misses something. The kernel of the argument is the statement: >>> Freitas compares nanomedicine development to the computer industry. "It took 50 years of market-driven research to bring computers to their present state," he says. "We will see a similar, but more rapid progression with nanomedicine." <<< Note the words "market driven". I would suggested that this technological revolution will not be driven, as a free market does not exist. It will be held back by politics and associate money making professions. Imagine a whole load of enthusiastic dogs being taken from a walk and being held back straining on leads by their cautious Master so that they don't run in the road or get into any other difficulty. In the early days of computers, you did not need to get a prescription for integrated circuits, you just went and ordered them by mail order. No one seriously worried about ethical considerations when designing a shift register, or whether they'd be sued for writing a spreadsheet application. Even if you consider car design as opposed to computers the risks are different. I recall when Sir Clive Sinclair introduced his "C5" electric "car" someone wrote that he had better be careful, because no one could be killed as a result of using one of the Spectrum computers that were his previous (and highly successful) piece of technological marketing. The medicines in use today were being touted as being gee whizz discoveries ten to 20 years ago, such is the regulatory time lag. Many more potential cures were found not to be as good as were first thought. If there is an effective aging reversal substance or procedure that will be available in 20 years time, it probably exists in some closely guarded laboratory right now. If it were announced and people believed it, there could be violent revolution from those who would die before they could get it. [Cryonics aside, what would they have to lose?] Breakdowns of public order in such circumstances have been suggested for decades. A notable example is John Wyndham's "The Trouble with Lichen", which now must be at least 50 years old. Technology is moving ahead, and yes indeed aging may end up being reversible. It after all just a matter of putting atoms back in the right place. Present medical procedures will be replaced by the genuine healing (ie you get better without being made iller first). But don't hold your breath waiting for it. -- Sincerely, John de Rivaz: http://John.deRivaz.com for websites including Cryonics Europe, Longevity Report, The Venturists, Porthtowan, Alec Harley Reeves - inventor, Arthur Bowker - potter, de Rivaz genealogy, Nomad .. and more Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=29653