CryoNet #32148 - #32152

CryoNet - Mon 9 Nov 2009

    #32149: Re: CryoNet #32137 - #32140 [2Arcturus]
    #32150: Immortality On Ice [David Stodolsky]
    #32151: Cryonic Across The Pond: Mr. Freeze Is In The House! [John B. Krug]
    #32152: Re: CryoNet #32141 [David Stodolsky]

1 message(s) removed from digest due to low reputation.

Rate This Digest: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32148%2D32152

Administrivia

To subscribe to CryoNet, send email to:
    [email protected]
with the subject line (not message _body_):
    subscribe
To unsubscribe, use the subject line:
    unsubscribe

To post a message to CryoNet, send your message to:
    [email protected]
(Note: A "Subject:" line starting the message body replaces
the "Subject:" line in the header.  This gives a second
opportunity to provide a meaningful subject line.)

Since all CryoNet messages are archived and accessible via WWW,
including search engines, make certain that your postings
reflect how you want the world to see you.

To retrieve past messages, send email to:
    [email protected]
with the message numbers in the subject line.
(Message 0003 describes the advanced syntax.)
You also can retrieve them via the CryoNet web page at URL:
    http://www.cryonet.org/

For administrative or other questions/suggestions, send email
to me at "[email protected]" with "cryonics" in the subject line.
    - Kevin Q. Brown


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message #32149
References: <[email protected]>
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 08:10:19 -0800 (PST)
From: 2Arcturus <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: CryoNet #32137 - #32140

--0-1125003913-1257696619=:88867

>>>Message #32140
Subject: Cryonics and organ transplants
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2009 22:49:01 -0500
From: [email protected]
3.  If a), then the patient's organs would be medically unusable for transplant.  We cannot prove (think 100 million dollars or more) to the FDA and various medical boards that our particular combination of fluids is "safe and effective" for living patients.  No transplant team in the United States would accept such organs.

It seems to me kind of a problem that there is such a discrepancy between cryonics stabilizing perfusate and the organ preservation solutions used for organ harvesting, especially when they are intended to do much the same thing - keep the organs in a maximally viable state.

It was my understanding that the Alcor solution is a variation based on a standard organ preservation solution - correct me if I am wrong. If the cryonics solutions are better at preserving viable organs, that out to be demonstrable by experiment. If the organ preservation solutions used by organ donation teams are  better, as verified by experiment, then why aren't cryonics sp's using them instead? Unless I am missing something, there shouldn't be a huge contradiction between the two.

>>>5.  In order for the transplanted organs to be viable, the procedures would have to done to hospital standards -- which today and perhaps for decades means the procedures would have to be done AT a hospital.

I don't see why a local organ transplant team could not be teamed with Alcor's standby teams wherever they go, which I gather is sometimes a hospital or a nursing home near a hospital. And why are cryonicists afraid of hospital standards?
In my opinion, the upside for cryonicists would be that we might get hospital buy-in on the urgency of cryonics stabilization - if doctors saw it combined with organ harvesting, it would provide more of a context for understanding it (just harvesting another organ, except one that will be preserved for the original donor not someone else), and also for understanding the urgency of stabilizing the patient, instead of seeing cryonics as a bizarre post-mortem exercise left to pathologists and funeral home directors.
And as has already been mentioned, it would put cryonicists' intentions in a better light.

>>>6.  This would require immense amounts of education and training of both hospital and cryotransport personnel so that they would be willing to cooperate, in order that both the organs for transplant AND the patient's head/brain were handled to maximum best effect.

It doesn't seem a bad idea to me that cryonicists might not retain at least one licensed surgeon for neuropreservations who could work with organ harvesting teams. Such a surgeon trained for cryonic sought already to be retained; and the organ transplant team optimally would not have to do anything different - just share the operating room and follow a protocol that optimized stabilization of the brain. It might be that solutions optimized to stabilize the brain might not be the same as those optimized to stabilize other organs, but it doesn't seem obvious to me that they might not also be adequate for those other organs, which is something cryonics researchers ought to be able to demonstrate, especially when they are making claims about being able to stabilize whole-body patients - if the
 re is no medical evidence for what cryonicists are doing, why are they doing it?

In my opinion, the goal should be to close the gap between medical practice and cryonics, not to accept it as an inevitable gulf.

I agree organ donation should not be an urgent, immediate goal for cryonics, but I just felt like responding to the broader issues you raised, which relate to other problems of cryonics today.


    
--0-1125003913-1257696619=:88867

 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1

[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32149

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message #32150
From: David Stodolsky <[email protected]>
Subject: Immortality On Ice
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 18:26:49 +0100
References: <[email protected]>

Does anyone have a copy of the Discovery Channel show, "Immortality On  
Ice"? It seems to be 'out of print'.

http://www.amazon.com/Immortality-Ice-Discovery-Channel/dp/B000OLJUZG


dss


David Stodolsky
[email protected]  Skype: davidstodolsky

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32150

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message #32151
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 11:59:54 -0800 (PST)
From: "John B. Krug" <[email protected]>
Subject: Cryonic Across The Pond: Mr. Freeze Is In The House!

--0-591967533-1257710394=:67981

Hi: 

I have a pet cyberspider that fetches me any cryonics news as it happens. 
Here's an interesting article from the Guardian. A cryonics training session in the UK observed by one Mr. Freeze aka Michael Darwin. [Mr. Freeze is meant in fun and not disrespect, for those microscoping for intentions] 

As usual there are a number of factual misunderstandings. The obvious one is the mix up up the Charles's. The writer meaning Manson and not Bronson. 
There's a recent photo of MD, going for the Emperor Ming or even Anton LeVey (?) look. 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/nov/07/cryonics-british-dads-army 

That's what it says.... 

Enjoy! 

JBK 

Yes, you can turn me on! I'm on the radio! 

Surf City Sounds Plus: http://www.Live365.com/stations/johns805?play

MySpace Freeform Radio Page: http://www.myspace.com/surfcitysoundsplus

Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/surfcitysounds
--0-591967533-1257710394=:67981

 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32151

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message #32152
From: David Stodolsky <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: CryoNet #32141
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 22:14:32 +0100
References: <[email protected]>

On 8 Nov 2009, at 11:00 AM, CryoNet wrote:

> If you
> consider the facts, religion and cryonics are actually on the same   
> side -
> cryonics doesn't offer infinite life, merely life of indefinite   
> duration.

According to the Badger data, religiosity is the best predictor of  
opposition to cryonics.


> Religion tells is followers to respect their own life and that of   
> others,
> (although a few of its adherents seem to lose this point at times.)   
> Law
> may
> seem hostile at times, but in fact it is totally neutral.

Law reflects culture, which is typically religion-based, and therefore  
biased against 'strange burial practices' almost everywhere.


> Of course within decades rather than centuries harvesting  organs for
> transplant will not be necessary or desireable. Instead they will   
> be grown
> from the patients' own cells.

This is already being done for simple organs. A video is linked from  
Cosmism.info.


dss


David Stodolsky
[email protected]  Skype: davidstodolsky

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32152

----------------------------------------------------------------------

End of CryoNet Digest
*********************