X-Message-Number: 9700
Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 18:42:14 -0700 (MST)
From: Fred Chamberlain <>
Subject: Jim Halperin's Proposal (Re: Jim replying to Joe Strout.)

Date:  May 12, 1998
From:  "Chamberlain, Fred" <>
Re:    Jim Halperin's Proposal (in the context of Jim replying to Joe Strout.)

I have been watching, carefully, the progression of Jim's idea from an
initial proposal of "inexpensive brain freezing" to one which now lays the
emphasis on tissue samples, with cautions and perhaps more budgetary
flexibility on brain freezings.

Some of Jim's revisions to his proposal have come about from comments on
CryoNet, and others from private communications, but there is no doubt that
they have in some part resulted from various counter proposals and
objections ranging from the purely intuitive to the scientific, from
considerations of PR to issues related to actual liabilities from the donors
and their relatives.

Below, in replying to Joe Strout, Jim applies some fine-tuning to his
proposal.  Based on that, I think it is time I said what I have to say,
although I can't promise to become part of any ongoing dialogues or
multilogues.  There just isn't time in my schedule.  I have already
communicated (internally, in Alcor circles) that (for example) BioTransport
cannot make any immediate offer to take on responsibilities for brain
freezing.  Its priorities to advance service levels for those who are
already signed up have to take priority.

 Jim says:

> Apparently I could have done a better 
> job explaining my offer. I never meant
> to suggest that we indiscriminately 
> harvest brains from every organ donor 
> that dies having signed up, or even that 
> we harvest any brains at all -- unless 
> and until current organ donation
> procedures change drastically. The 
> program would start out as one that
> collects tissue samples only, then expand
> to brains-only if ever there's value in 
> doing so.  I believe this was stated 
> accurately in my original posting, but
> perhaps not as clearly as it should have been.


TISSUE SAMPLES?

Tissue samples have their own problems.  The good news is that they are
technically simpler; it is easier to demonstrate that DNA is preserved, even
DNA potentially adequate for cloning.  On the other hand, there are deep
issues to be disclosed if any kind of "life extension" motivations are sought.


CLONING AS RELATED TO TRUE "LIFE EXTENSION"

(a)  The idea of cloning as a valid aspect of life extension (other than
"repair" of a true suspendee) require a vision of what future society might
be like.

***  Mike Darwin (perhaps a decade ago) wrote an article about an Egyptian
princess whose DNA might be used to "bring her back" (she would not know
*who* she was from a standpoint of internal memory and experience, but she
would know *who* she was from objective evidence and history; there would be
a strong and powerful psychological "connectivity" with the past which would
amount to a synthesis of identity, if not a true reconstruction of it.

***  Thomas Donaldson (also, perhaps a decade ago) wrote a beautiful short
story about a person in a space colony whose only memory was of his father
bringing a speared animal into a primitive campsite.  The story developed
the image of people whose only heritage was fragments of knowledge of the
past civilizations from which they arose.  They were clonal regenerations.

***  Jim Halperin, in "The First Immortal" (TFI), weaves such scenarios
realistically into stories of life in the United States only a few decades
downstream from now.  Readers of TFI come away with a profoundly expanded
grasp of the potential of life extension, in which anti-aging therapies,
cryonics, cloning and many other facets of a believable world are
practically within our grasp.


TISSUE SAMPLES AS A ROUTE TO EXPANSION OF SCIENTIFIC UNDERSTANDING

(b)  But those who have not entertained such ideas may find "tissue samples"
alone an enigmatic matter.  They might grasp the idea that their personal
histories might correlate with specific genomic patterns, and thus expand
the knowledge of how our minds reflect our genomes.  They might find it
plausible that some unique talents were largely the consequence of genomic
influences, and might see the scientific study of these.  Whether or not
such ideas would add to their incentives to sign up as organ donors is
unknown, but they would perhaps be more likely to relate to such thoughts
than to the more fanciful ideas in (a) above.  In any case, the shift from
brain preservation to tissue samples is not without its own complexities.


BACK TO BRAIN FREEZING

A great deal would depend on how the program were presented to the public,
both in the media attention it received, and through the organ donation
programs where a card might be actually filled out.  In the latter case, one
would expect an information sheet to be provided which would describe the
possible uses of the brain and options the donor might want to consider, for
example:
 SUPPOSE THE PRIMARY THRUST WERE "STUDY OF DEGREES OF DAMAGE - PURE RESEARCH"?

(Then the info sheet accompanying the donor card might say)

"Brains donated to Alcor, unless otherwise arranged for, would be used to
study the degree of damage done by the prolonged periods of deterioration at
room temperature necessary to verify "brain death".  So far as any
conventional medical authority of today might admit, those structural losses
might be so severe as to have wiped out all personal identity and memory.

"Even admitting that this could be the case, Alcor is doing research to
determine what, if any, residual structural traces remain, after the very
worst damage that any brain will normally sustain (excepting for traumatic
head injuries.) The research will involve examination of brain structure by
light microscopy, electron microscopy, and what (in the future) might be
called 'molecular microscopy'.  

"Donors (AT NO EXPENSE TO THEM) may contact Alcor and express a desire to
have their brains preserved intact for long periods of time, for
non-invasive study by future technologies.   They may elect to provide a
release and consent form for the outside chance that rudimentary traces of
their identities might remain, which future scientists might consider
sufficient for attempts to restore consciousness and (therefore) life.

"To repeat, such a possibility cannot be currently substantiated or
supported, so no service charges are made to organ donors who consent to
retention of their brains for such study.  No monetary donations are
required or even requested.  Contact Alcor at (800)367-2228 for further
information."


WHAT WOULD ALCOR'S TRUE OBLIGATIONS AND LIABILITIES BE, UNDER THESE
CIRCUMSTANCES?

So long as no funds were accepted from these anatomical donors, Alcor's
obligations would be limited to carrying out whatever procedures were agreed
with Jim Halperin, in connection with "directed donations" to support this
activity.  That could range from rudimentary study of such brains to higher
level preservation and evaluation.

Any who contacted Alcor could be provided with a set of paperwork which
clearly required an acknowledgment that the donor was *not* becoming an
Alcor Member, but simply furnishing additional information to support the
study of their donation.

In those cases where consent were given for restoration of consciousness, it
would be clearly spelled out that Alcor had no obligation to make such an
attempt, or even to pursue research toward such an end.  Such a paper would
serve as a release for Alcor to use its own discretion and judgement about
what was done, releasing it from any associated liabilities.

Such a donor *might* inquire further about Alcor and (then) become a member,
canceling the anatomical donation for organ transplantation.  In that case,
we would have acquired a new member, at the expense of the loss of such a
donor from the organ donation pool.

I think it highly unlikely that the number of those who would ever reach
such a point would even approach 25% of those who initially signed donor
cards and put them in their wallets.

Even in such a drastic case, of the total who originally signed up as organ
donors, 75% would still have been added to the group willing for their
organs to be used for transplantation, given the right conditions.


WHAT DOES "BRAIN PRESERVATION UNDER THE WORST CONDITIONS MEAN, IN TERMS OF
IDENTITY"?

It means that the resolution of neural interconnections and their
termination points would be diminished, perhaps even to the point of loss of
the positions and shape of entire neurons.  The elaborate weave of
interconnections could diminish until the "rebuilding process" required
"guesswork" as to the location, size and characteristics of entire nuclei
and functional structures.  How much, if any, "identity" would be left,
under these conditions?  While we may not *know* we should at least think a
small amount about this.


 HOW MUCH DO WE HAVE, TO LOSE?

(a)  At one level, we might lose all of those dazzling flashes of, "Gee
whiz, I had forgotten entirely about that trip, but now it comes back to me
perfectly!"  Every now and then, we get such flashes.  They might be greatly
diminished, or gone.  How much resolution of structural loss is involved in
such diminishment?  Perhaps the neurological literature can help us assess
this, perhaps not.  In any case, this is one level of loss.  Nine tenths of
our memory content might be tied up in such "mostly hidden" memories.  Would
our lives be of no value to us, if these were to disappear?  Probably not.
There would be a sense of loss, but probably not so much of a sense of loss
as if we were to lose our senses of hearing and/or sight.  Life would go on,
for us.

(b)  At a deeper level, we might find that there were fleeting flashes of
even what one would consider to be normal memories.   People we knew only a
few years ago might be difficult to remember.  Their names might come with
more difficulty, or not at all.  We might find that going through an old
address book allowed us to recapture a little sense of who these people
were, but they would not seem as highly focused in our memories as before.
We might find that streets of a city we once lived in were only dimly
recalled.  There might be a sense of confusion, in some of these more
plausible, well reinforced memories.  If we were to lose such memory
connectivity, suppose that measurements by future psychologists indicated
99% of the content of those memories were vanished?  Yet, even with 1%
retention, those closest to us would still be well remembered.  In that
case, would we trade our eyesight or hearing for a clearer set of memories?
Probably not.

(c)  Suppose there were only the capacity to recognize familiar photographs
or objects, a kind of "purely intuitive recognition" which bordered on what
ESP researchers seek.  An uncanny familiarity with some parts of the past
might be all that remained of former, razor sharp memories and professional
capacities.  Would we rather have those capacities back, in perfect order,
than our eyesight or hearing?  Would we be willing to surrender being able
to walk and run, so as to have these tantalizing remnants of the past back?
Would we be willing to come back old, debilitated and helplessly disabled,
if we could at the same time have all of the "good old days" in perfect
clarity to muse over?  I doubt it.


 WHAT KIND OF PEOPLE ARE GOING TO "FIT IN", IN THE FUTURE?

This brings us to a challenging question.  Who are going to be the people
who pass through the time tunnel in the best shape, and then go on to open
new doors and expand their identities?  Will it be those who cling to the
past, fearful to lose even a shred of their identities (which seem to fade
anyway with time?)  Will it be those who can't decide, for a list of reasons
so long that we find ourselves shuffling them to find "why cryonics has
failed?"  Or will the future be populated by those who relish new
adventures, so satisfied with a crystal clear mind upon reanimation that the
loss of memories, even many of them, will seem a trivial penalty?

Many are those who object to cryonics on the basis of how costly it is, or
that it is not technically proven, or that there is too much disharmony on
CryoNet, or that they fear the rejection of their neighbors, or that lost
rapport with their present families would be too great a price.  No one,
least of all I, will argue that these objections are invalid.  They are
perfectly acceptable.

On the other hand, one can also argue that such positions are those of
people who are not happy with what they have now; that they are hoping
against all odds that a "trouble free trip to the future" will "solve their
problems for them".  In far too many cases, perhaps those in cryonics are
seeking a panacea, or an ego trip, or a "free ride to a guaranteed nirvana."
In such cases, no answers will suffice.  Just as there are no "free
lunches", there are no "cheap immortalities!"

The future, let's face it, will be challenging.  Waking up each morning (if
we have to sleep at all) is likely to be like climbing on a mach 10 sled
track, and there may be so many outlets for those with a sense of adventure
that others  who (tday) suffer from feelings of inferiority could find it a
living hell.

On the other hand, those with an unrestrained thirst for exploration will
find their horizons expanded beyond anything we can imagine.  Even with
serious losses of memory,  the current difficulties of cryonics and dealing
with potential pitfalls may appear to have been a trivial cost.

 Selling cryonics to the masses might be compared with selling them
equipment to climb Mt. Everest, or do cave diving.  Only a few people may
have the inclination to do these things anyway, and that may be a serious
limitation.   But do I really think this is the case?  Do I believe that
only a tiny fragment of humanity "has what it takes" to be interested in the
future and the determination to be part of it?

No, I do not, and I apologize for any confusion the above discussion might
have caused.

Actually, I think we are just about to encounter the right group of people
for cryonics.  They will be, I think, those who see the future as portrayed
in "The First Immortal" and will hunger for it.  They will *not*, for the
most part, be the unrealistic, fear ridden types who may have been inclined
to see cryonics as a form of "salvation".  Neither will they be macho
"ego-trippers" wanting to be "the first on their block" to wear a cryonics
bracelet.

They will be a huge group of pioneers, of the kind who "settled the West"
about a hundred years ago, and who now will set out to "settle the Future!"
They will come past those of us who thought you could only get here with a
mule or on horseback, first in covered wagons, then in stage coaches, and
before you know it they will be building railroads across the mountains to
life extension and putting in airfields.

At great risk of being proven dead wrong by future history, I think most of
them will gravitate to cryonics as a result of reading "The First Immortal".
I think this is *the* book which is going to bring them in.  There will be
others, but this one will stand like the Pyramids or The Great Wall of
China.  My main basis for thinking this is that I have been reading about
life extension ever since I was twelve years old, in the late 1940's, and
this is the first work I think makes life extension seem as "easy and
natural as breathing and taking a walk down by the river."

Those who hang back, now and later, worried that "it might not work" will, I
think, be like those who stayed in St. Louis until the rails reached all the
way to San Francisco.  That's all right.

The later day settlers will not (to follow the "Old West" analogy) be set
upon by hostile Indians, be taken advantage of by small town gunslingers and
gamblers, get involved in the political feuds of small mining towns, or even
have to work hard to homestead patches of land which don't turn out to be
fertile.

When aging remedies are worked out, they will get them from their local
doctors; when cerebral resuscitation therapies are available in every "911"
ambulance, they will be safer; if they need suspended animation, it will be
covered by their medical insurance.  When it is a conventional thing to back
up your "identity module" before taking a long or dangerous trip, they will

do it as naturally as they can buy passenger insurance in an air terminal today.

Meanwhile, others of us are impatient, or do not think we have sufficient
lifespan to sit and wait.  We will open the roads and lay the rails.  From
our point of view, we don't have a choice.  We see a way across the
mountains and we're going to go up and over, or "know the reason why!"


The meek shall inherit the Earth.  The rest of us (mostly) will go to the stars!

Boundless Life,

Fred Chamberlain, President/CEO ()
Alcor Life Extension Foundation
Non-profit; Cryonic Suspension Memberships since 1972.
400+ Members, 35 in suspension as of April, 1998
7895 E. Acoma Dr., Suite 110, Scottsdale AZ 85260-6916
Phone (602) 922-9013  (800) 367-2228   FAX (602) 922-9027
 for general requests
http://www.alcor.org

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=9700