X-Message-Number: 3211 From: (Ian Taylor) Newsgroups: sci.cryonics Subject: Current biostatis techniques Date: 4 Oct 1994 09:16:52 -0500 Message-ID: <> [ Note: The following message, which Brian Wowk responded to in message #3208, never arrived at my USENET machine, due to some glitch in the USENET feed. Thanks to Brian Wowk for forwarding it to me. - KQB ] Recently Steve Bridge wrote: >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. Thanks for for non-official guess Steve ;) and for such a unexpectedly full response. With all respect Steve your answer was not to the question I was trying to ask. Let me clarify. My question is far less demanding on our technology. I am not requiring initially a reversible process; only damage- free entry into biostasis, the critical first step as I see it. We then rely on future technology to restore function etc. To me this is *the* question: how far away is our current technology from an ideal biostasis technique. Without some *measure* of our capability I fear that any discussion will be highly subjective and open to misinterpretation either by those in favour or against it. A table like this would help me to understand the current state of practice, perhaps you can correct and complete it: Biostasis Damage due Duration of Technique to technique Biostasis Notes Cremation 100% N/A For completeness ;) Burial 99% 100 years? Bones, DNA only ... ? Dry Ice 5%? 1 year? Old technique Vitrification 1%? Indefinite? Current technique? Fixation & Vit. 0.1%? " Proposed " Ideal 0% Indefinite Complete preservation WARNING the above table is for discussion purposes only, and most likely has no resemblance to fact. >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. Yes, it was in Drexler's, "Engines of Creation" that I first came across these fascinating ideas of biostasis and cellular repair stated so elegantly. On page 134 Drexler claims that: "Fixation *together* with vitrification seems adequate to ensure long term biostasis." I gather from what you say that this method has not been explored, why not? >We still don't know what the biological criteria is for a >recoverable identity, and probably won't know for at least a decade. By identity do you mean memory, or personality or something else? >And all current patients have at least some kind of ischemic and freezing >injury which will have to be repaired ... Ah now this is closer to my question, so how extensive is this damage? I shall resist following up on more of your points here Steve, have no fear I have them preserved in my database, all I need now is the time ... Who knows, that may be one excuse unavailable in the future :) Hmmm, maybe time I had a new signature? Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=3211