Re: Walt Disney Question and frozen hearts

Here, Cecil mentioned that in ten years people were predicting that frozen hearts would be transplanted. Well, it’s been nine years now and I was wondering if that prediction came true.

Actually, it’s been 19 years. But who’s counting?

ok, I can’t find the OP walt disney thread so I’m posting here, sorry if I’m butting in. I just wanted to know the status of a crygenics “patient” when they are frozen. Dead or not dead?

ok, I can’t find the OP walt disney thread so I’m posting here, sorry if I’m butting in. I just wanted to know the status of a cryogenics “patient” when they are frozen. Dead or not dead?

oops :rolleyes:

:smack:
I should know this too, since I was born in 86.

Umm…Dead or not dead?

Freezing someone who is alive is murder. The authorities frown on that. You’d have to be dead first to by cryogenically frozen. Once you’re dead, the temperature of your corpse is unlikely to affect your legal status.

Well, with a written statement and a good lawyer these days who knows, you must admit most of these people are pretty well-off and if they’re dead already what’s the real chance of bringing them back. This process is even stupider than I thought it to begin with…sigh

So nobody knows if we’re transplanting frozen hearts?

I’m guessing that if no one’s heard of it, we’re not doing it.

Wasn’t there a story on NPR a few weeks back about a mammal (I’m remembering that it was a dog, but it may have been a hamster.) (I get them confused often) that had been frozen and then revived? Maybe it’s time for an update to this column, to cover the progress made (or not) in this field over the last nineteen years.

Twas a hamster I believe and they basically killed the thing and brought it back in the same session. Not really what’s involved difficulty-wise with a patient that most probably died first and then was transported over to the cryogenics lab and frozen for 50 years.

And for it to be a truly viable science, they should have the cryogenics part down to …well, a science as it is a very empty field without the part that involves freezing all sorts of things.

The need for maintaining the structural integrity of a biological form, ideally for infinity… until the advances of medical science has caught-up with reversing whatever problem it is a definate plus for the credibility of this field. Medical science shouldn’t have to catch-up with whatever disease some person had and then catch-up with the technology to competently unfreeze them without damaging them in any way.

In other words, they should work this out to begin with before naming this field anything, because frozen hearts or not. Any sane person wouldn’t pay what it cost to store their ass so long without science having already worked out how they are going to un-freeze them in order to be treated.

…And though you have no God, there is science all around you and plenty faith…