X-Message-Number: 9994 Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1998 09:30:44 -0400 From: Thomas Donaldson <> Subject: CryoNet #9981 - #9992 Hi everyone! I must disagree with Saul Kent's assessment of our problem in recruiting. (I emphatically do NOT disagree with his desire for much more research into better suspension methods). Here is the issue as I see it. All cryonicists are convinced not just that revival may be possible, but that revival will be followed by cures for whatever illnesses "killed" us, rejuvenation, and other improvements. If that did not happen then there would be no reason at all to be suspended: if your disease would never be cured, then what's the point? It's easy for us to jump from the idea that if suspension became possible, all the other things that come after it will also become possible. So easy, perhaps, that we commonly forget that most people not only distrust our ideas about suspension but also distrust our ideas about the future of medicine. Even if suspension were perfect, the idea that (say) we could then cure aging, senility (the mental kind ie. Alzheimer's and other such conditions), cancers of all kinds, regrow any lost limbs or organs, and so on and on will be met by automatic disbelief. WE see just a little of this in Jack Haldeman's claim that reanimation may be very painful. Not only that, but even our most optimistic scenario --- suspended animation in 20 years, is likely to be met by total incomprehension by the vast majority of people when it arrives. Suspended animation cures nohing at all. So not only does it leave you sick, but it takes you from a familiar setting to one which will be quite unfamiliar. Unless you believe that you really will be cured of diseases which no one now even claims are curable (say, for instance, brain damage), the entire exercise seems one of masochism rather than medicine. In convincing people that cryonic suspension will be helpful we also come up against a very common medical attitude: if we can't cure X now, then that isn't just a passing problem to be solved in 100 years. It is a metaphysical condition of the world, which will not change for centuries. Sure, we can see that the possibility of curing some condition seeps slowly into physicians' minds, but plenty of problems still have that "impossible to cure" tag attached to them in the minds of most doctors --- and all those people who listen to them. Suppose again that our suspended animation was virtually perfect: if suspended you would arrive at some future revival with virtually no damage. Clearly even if they believed it, rich, famous, or prominent people are not going to take up even the option of suspended animation while healthy. They have nothing at all to gain from it and will lose their standing in today's society, their money, and much else. And arrive in an unknown land. The kind of people who might take us up on such an option are those who feel downtrodden and unsuccessful in the society of today. (If they can get together the money!). Such people do not provide us with the kind of testimonials that someone rich and famous might. Finally, I will add that this is my present opinion. I don't think Saul could convince me differently by any amount of verbal argument. Yes, I could be convinced if lots of people flocked to cryonics once we have much better methods for suspension. As for now, though, I don't believe that will happen. So why do I still strongly support research? Because I value myself and my life, and want to see it continue. Even if it turns out to work (after 200 years) present suspension methods are risky. I'd like at least to know that my suspension will be more secure. And frankly I can think of no better reason to support research. Sure, I'd like to convert my relatives, but that looks like a lost cause. I support research because I hope it will help ME. Best and long long life to all, Thomas Donaldson Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=9994