X-Message-Number: 32475
References: <>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 13:09:25 -0800 (PST)
From: Luke Parrish <>
Subject: Alternate forms of cryonics

There are several reasons I would like to see isolated brain cryonics
put on the market. It sounds like it could be financially as well as
psychologically easier for a much wider portion of the population.
This could prove pivotal to cryonics gaining more widespread
acceptance. A brain doesn't have a face, so people don't get upset at
it in the same way they do with a severed head. (In fact, it is an
icon of logical thought and reason in our culture.)

Body-attached "neuro" like Melody has mentioned currently seems to me
the ideal form of viability-preserving cryonics available. It is
certainly less politically sensitive, possibly medically better, and
we already know full-body vitrification to be relatively futile
compared to brain vitrification, and there's enough technology to
demonstrate that a body can be recreated -- rational skepticism is
always about brain survival.

While being more publicly acceptable, the attached-body method does
invite somewhat more regulation (essentially being a mortuary or
medical practice). People are more likely to miss the point. But it
does provide a politically safer way to keep the head as the brain's
natural container, which minimizes the chance of damage to unfixed
tissues.

The basic issue is, there is a strong subconscious/instinctive ethic
in most humans to treat the dead in a "respectful" way -- despite
knowing that they can't feel anything. Full body preservation fits
nicely into that ethic. Isolated brain preservation fits nicely into
the more logical and pragmatic sort of thinking regarding information
preservation. But head-inclusive preservation tends to get stuck in a
sort of limbo between these two.


> X-Message-Number: 32473
> From: "Jordan Sparks" <>
>
> HoooRahh, Mike!  I've been pushing for fixation as a lower quality
> last resort for the destitute.  But Aschwin's idea is sort of an
> intermediate between room temp fixation and neuro.  It has taken me
> months to warm up to the idea, but I am steadily growing more
> supportive of it.  I am curious to see what the electricity might
> cost.  The equipment seems to be available at a few hundred dollars
> per patient.  Very doable.  The sticky point is that neither Alcor
> nor CI will touch this option.  Their reasons are valid given their
> business models and political environments.  It will require a third
> cryonics company to see this idea to fruition.
>
> As for David's concerns, I'm convinced for now that our current form
> of government provides enough protection from tyranny of the
> majority. And even the majority is very sympathetic to supporting a
> person's last wishes. In some families neuro can be a problem, but
> in others it simply isn't.

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32475

Warning: This message was filtered from the daily CryoNet digest
because the poster's reputation was too low.
It thus may need to be rated.