X-Message-Number: 3186
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 94 13:26:41
From: Steve Bridge <>
Subject: CRYONICS.SCI Answers to Taylor questions
To CryoNet and sci.cryonics
>From Steve Bridge, President
Alcor Life Extension Foundation
September 28, 1994
In response to: Message: #3180 - Seven questions
Newsgroups: sci.cryonics
Message-ID: <>
From: (Ian Taylor)
Date: 26 Sep 1994 03:20:13 -0500
Thanks to Bob Ettinger for answering some of Ian Taylor's questions.
I won't try to add much on the technical issues. There are several people
who can do that more thoroughly than I. But I will try to add some
perspective of my own.
>0 When can we expect to have a technique that ensures permanent, damage-
>free biostatis?
For any of us, a DATE on this is a wild guess. My personal, non-
official guess, is that within 50 years it will be possible for a living,
healthy human being to be placed in some form of very-long term (if not
technically "permanent") biostasis and be revived with no ill effects.
This may turn out to involve techniques very different from those used in
cryonics today. Real suspended animation may be performed without
freezing, vitrification, or even significant cooling. Eric Drexler and
others have proposed that this might be accomplished through very
elaborate, rapid, and precise chemical fixation. I won't predict which
method or combination of methods might work best.
The question of when patients suspended with current technology (or
that of the past 26 years) will be repairable and revivable is even more
difficult. We still don't know what the biological criteria is for a
recoverable identity, and probably won't know for at least a decade. And
all current patients have at least some kind of ischemic and freezing
injury which will have to be repaired at the cellular or molecular level.
I suspect the following general criteria that will have to be satisfied
before such repair can occur.
1. Some collection of technologies will have to be developed that makes
it possible to repair cells and their parts.
2. These technologies and others will be used first to LEARN more about
how cells and organs operate and interrelate. We will also have to learn
a huge amount about what constitutes identity and memory, how our genome
functions, and what chemicals signals trigger differentiation and growth.
(It has been pointed out that some of the signals for this may come from
the MOTHER rather than from the fetus's DNA, which will complicate cloning
and other repair scenarios.)
3. When this understanding is reached -- which may take decades of study
and experimentation, even with the help of "artificial intelligence," if
such really becomes practical -- we humans then have to decide WHAT WE
WANT. This process will not be simple, and computers cannot make the
choices for us. It may turn out to be a simple thing to engineer aging
out of a human's DNA, but at what biological price? It seems very
possible that the same genes involved in senescence are also involved in
growth of the fetus and child, in prevention of uncontrolled growth and
cancer, and in natural repair of damaged tissue. Simply switching or
removing genes may create dozens of other problems. It may turn out to be
simpler and safer to control senescence by adding chemicals (or "nano-
robots") than by subtracting genetic instructions.
In any case, these are decisions that will need to be made. Many
would like to make those decisions on an individual basis; but for many
reasons that may not be possible. There may not be a time in the next
century where wealth and energy are unlimited for each individual.
Resources will probably continue to be limited, at least in the areas of
finance, computing power, and, especially, intelligent and creative human
minds. Restrictions will then be placed on which areas of research are
pursued. Your favorite may not get much attention. The "RIGHT" solution
(whatever that turns out to be) may not get much attention for a long
time.
And a large number of us may well be in some form of biostasis with
no ability to influence the outcome at all.
4. Once the decisions are made (or perhaps concurrently), someone has to
formulate the repair algorithm, write the software, and engineer the
specific equipment needed. Anyone familiar with the confused state of
software design for massive projects today will recognize that the pathway
to un-buggy software is murky at best.
5. Almost finally, the interest, organization, and finances must be
available to accomplish the repair itself.
6. REALLY, finally, a system must be worked out to give the revived
individuals a chance (no guarantees) at survival and happiness in what may
be a vastly changed civilization.
My public statements to the media have been that this should be possible
in a hundred years or so. But over the last year, I have come to think
that a century is the absolute MINIMUM time for all of this to be
accomplished. What one person can think of does not translate to human
action in a short time period. Even having all of the tools available in
a few decades does not provide the human will to overcome our own inertia.
>4 How many people are now in suspension? (The FAQ gives 60 as reported in
> July 1992 - perhaps Alcor can update their figures of 271 members/22
> suspensions?)
Alcor currently has 27 patients in cryonic suspension (10 whole body
and 17 neuro) and about 350 members. I think the 60 number was a bit too
high at that time. Cryonics Institute's 13 gets the total to 40. I
believe that the American Cryonics Society is responsible for about 10
patients, and Trans Time has separate responsibility for 2-4 patients.
Marginally, some might count the two patients Trygve Bauge is responsible
for; but last I heard, they were on dry ice. Also in the marginal
category are two women supposedly still in home freezers in France.
>5 Are there any alternatives to cryonic suspension forseen in the next
>ten years?
I'm unsure what a timeline might be; but as I mentioned above, it is
possible that new chemical fixation methods could be developed. However,
I don't see a movement currently beginning to do that research. We KNOW
that with proper treatment many tissues survive freezing. We have a base
of knowledge and success to begin with. We don't know that cells can
survive chemical fixation. This depends on some new understandings and an
even stronger acceptance of the principle that structure=life. It seems
possible that some form of chemical treatment might lock up cell
structures well enough to prevent identity loss. Right now, it is just an
interesting question.
>6 Are cryonic services available in Europe?
Alcor has an active chapter in the United Kingdom, with about 13
members, including at least three gentlemen with e-mail access:
Garret Smyth
Mike Price
Andrew Clifford
We also have several members in Spain and Germany. The small numbers
of European cryonicists so far means that there are only a few trained
transport technicians in that area. And we expect that access to the
patient -- before and after legal death-- may be difficult for some time
until we get more experience there. Language and governmental differences
will also be a problem. Not to mention the distance from the United
States, where all storage is currently done and where the most experienced
cryonicists live and work. But Alcor is committed to doing all it can to
get to our members and suspend them, even in Europe and Australia, where
we also have several members.
So don't be shy; jump on in. One person's energy can do a lot in a
small group. Someday we expect that Europe will have its own cryonics
organizations with local management and storage. Right now, you get to be
a pioneer! A major influence! Your name in lights! Working your butt
off! (oops, reality just reared its ugly head.) But that's the way
changes occur -- keep adding people and keep working hard.
After all, if we get enough people involved now, we might be able to
cut that 100 years minimum all the way down to 80 or 90 years. (grin)
Steve Bridge
Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=3186