X-Message-Number: 9839 Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 15:43:15 -0400 From: Saul Kent <> Subject: "...almost free..." Thomas Donaldson comments (9824) about funding to revive us as follows: "There is a general pattern to technological advances: the first time is VERY expensive, after which it gets less and less expensive. Finally, it's almost free." I've heard that general kind of assessment a number of times from cryonicists: that future medical science (in the era of nanotech) will not only be greatly advanced (and sophisticated), but also very inexpensive. That may happen, but I wouldn't count on it. Repairing the brain of a patient frozen with today's technology will be a formidable problem, perhaps one of the most formidable ones faced by future medicine. In addition, a new body may have to be grown, possibly for full body patients as well as neuros. These aren't trivial matters, and I don't think we can dismiss them by simply suggesting that it may be "...almost free..." to revive cryonics patients. I also don't think it's enough to say as Thomas says: "I see no way at all to validly estimate that cost." I agree that there's no way to *validly* estimate the costs of revival, but I think we need to begin trying to do so anyway. In any case, it will certainly cost *something* (even if it is "almost free"), and it may cost a great deal. As we improve our cryonics methods, it should become progressively easier to estimate the costs of reanimation because the biological damage that will have to be repaired will lessen (for those who are cryopreserved with these methods), and our knowledge of how to repair biological damage will increase. As these methods improve, I also believe that people will become more confident about the possibility of revival and, as a result, will be more concerned about how to pay for it, and who can afford it. Thomas speculates that the economy of the distant future may be very different from what we have today. ("There may even have an advance on capitalism."). I agree, but cryonics patients will have to be maintained from their current existence in today's economy to whatever is going to come in the future. If we are to be revived, it will be necessary for those reponsible for us in the future to adapt to changing conditions. It is *our* responsibility to try to meet the costs of reanimation as best we can, given our current state of knowledge, and our current economy, so that those who care for us in the future will have the best possible resources available to help them to adapt to a changing economy, as well as changing political, legal, social, environmental and technologic conditions. ---Saul Kent Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=9839