X-Message-Number: 5619
Newsgroups: sci.cryonics
From:  (Brad Templeton)
Subject: Re: Don't talk about neurosuspension
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 1996 20:44:47 GMT
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <>

I'm not saying deny Neuro.  I'm saying express it as, in a slightly
equivocal way, what it actually is.  It *is* a cost saving measure.
There's lots of information about your life, how you looked, what your
motor skills were in your body that's not in your brain or even in your
DNA.  Yes, there's also information about how you decayed as you got
old.   If cost were not an object, *of course* you would keep the body
for its information content, so long as keeping the body didn't hurt
the best suspension of the brain.

You might very well intend to throw away the body after scanning it for
information and grow a new one based on that info.  Or who knows, perhaps
the fashion will be to look mature but feel young, and you will want the
exact look of your body.  Point is we have no idea about what tastes will
be like after revival, and, if it weren't for cost issues, throwing away
useful information is dumb.   So it is a cost saving measure.  With new
femoral based perfusion and flush-out techniques, it may not hurt the
brain suspension either.   But at worst case, if you were Bill Gates, you
would have their cut your head off your body and have them preserve
both.
-- 
Brad Templeton, publisher, ClariNet Communications Corp.	 
The net's #1 E-Newspaper (1,160,000 paid sbscrbrs.)  http://www.clari.net/brad/


Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=5619