View Single Post
Old 12-26-2017, 03:12 PM
SamuelA is offline
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 3,369
Originally Posted by Sunny Daze View Post
I worked in Alzheimer's research at Stanford University. I'll try to keep up with your stupendous string of blathering nonsense.

I take issue in particular with this:

By several incentives, you mean health professionals prefer not to get charged for murder in order to "preserve" memories via a method which has never been shown to be effective at doing that. Oddly, healthcare professional prefer to provide quality care, and on the research side, we amused ourselves by trying to find an actual cure. Quaintly, we could do this without killing our patients and freezing their brains, and then waiting an unknown time for technology to be invented to see if there is anything left to be salvaged.

Really, why stop with Alzheimer's, you could expand to any terminal illness. They're all going to die anyway, amirite? Kill them now, while their brains are "fresh". No point in wasting medical care on anyone.

You are someone I would characterize as evil. You casually throw around the idea that early death for people whose lives have no meaning for you is reasonable. Their death is a worthwhile thing because it will help you pursue your dream of cryo. The idea that human death is a reasonable course of action to support Cryo is monstrous.
Nothing in your post can be considered a rational thought. You're starting with the preconceived notion that death is absolute, not relative, and working from there. Freezing a person who is certain to rot into a corpse later is in fact better than the alternative. The freezing does less damage than the death + rotting, so...

I would characterize you as the evil one, and history will prove me right. As a result of the dominant beliefs that you and your peers hold, we send over a million people to the ground, every year, without even attempting to preserve some of them.

There will be an era of human history where preservation of the terminally ill is practiced on a large scale. I may or may not personally live to see it, but this is the obvious thing to do for non-idiots. Our current methods (freezing in liquid nitrogen + injected chemicals to reduce frost damage) are basically shit. They are only a little better than the alternative. We should be pouring money into making the preservation better. Perhaps half of all medical research money, since it obviously treats all diseases, while any given research can at best delay death from a single class of disease.

By my perspective, the weighting I am mentally performing is as follows :

Suppose a person has a month left to live. You are very certain of this - you have a laboratory confirmed diagnosis and statistically, 99.9% of the patients in this pool die within 30 days. (we can discuss greater uncertainty at a later time). You could either get at most 30 days of interaction with that human being, or freeze them. Let's saying freezing them preserves only 50% of their mind, the other half is lost. But if you do potentially revive them in the future, and you think there's a 50% chance that will happen (so down to net '25% of them is left'), you get 25% of them for 1000 years.

A rational person multiplies. A person who believes in woo does not. Unfortunately, a lot of people...even well educated doctors...believe in woo.

Of course we should research new treatments for disease, but for a person that is terminally ill, the odds are about 99.9% they are just going to die. It is very rare for clinical trials to work, most people don't even get them or get put in the control group, and so on.

Last edited by SamuelA; 12-26-2017 at 03:17 PM.