Alcor offering vitrification — nanotech not needed?
from the glass-not-ice dept.
sjvan writes "Alcor is now planning on vitrifying rather than freezing all new neurosuspension patients. This represents a major improvement in the quality of preservation, and consequently the probability of recovery. Look here for more details." CP: In that piece, Fred Chamberlain writes that this new procedure may eliminate the need for molecular nanotechnology in reviving these patients.
November 16th, 2000 at 7:04 PM
Vitrification for Biostasis
It is good to see that the work that should have been done 10 years ago is finally being done. However, there is still alot more to do here. According to Alcor's website, they are still planning to store patients in liquid N2, which is below the glass transition temperature for human tissue. This means that physical cracking still occurs in the brains being cryopresserved. A storage solution that can be used at -135 to -140C still needs to be developed, but this vitrification technique is still a big step in the right direction. Neuro-cryopresservation can be perfected, which means that, in theory, patients can be revived by using some kind of stem-cell based technology togrow them new bodies. Since I have always doubted the possibility of "dry" nanotech (for lach of a better term), vitrification makes the revival of cryonics patients much more likely and in a much shorter time period, say 50-60 years.
November 17th, 2000 at 5:04 AM
Re:Vitrification for Biostasis
After reading the Alcor news, I am left wondering
1 How long do you figure it will take for someone to revive a mammal (lets say a mouse) using this technique?
2 If they can accomplish the first question, do you think that Cryo-burials will become more mainstream than they are now?
I have to admit…I was a bit skeptical about the liquid nitrogen storage of a body, however, this method has made me think that perhaps it could work someday in the not so far future…
only thing is, without "dry" nanotech, would we be coming back only to die again?
The laws currently forbid cloning…do you think that would be the same in the future for cloning whole bodies so we simply do a head (brain) transplant (cloning a body without the head…is that possible?)? anyone in the field or fighting the cause have a responce for this?
Does Alcor have a marketing department? If not then shouldn't they? I know simply by talking to the older generation that the concept is interesting to them however they barely know of the foundation except from news 20 years outdated….granted not much happened since then until now but still…
Do you think hospitals will offer this service to the dying soon so not to waste precious time before brain damage starts to occur?
I would think its the responsibility of places like Alcor and any other involved tech business to suggest this to the local officals and private hospitals…seems that big buisness has a louder voice than the individuals…
I am worried that I would pay for cryo-stasis only to rot in a hospital someday because the hospital didn't know the technique to suspend me…seems like good money gone to waste where it could have been passed down to my family.
What a tough time we live in…short sighted people have a way of controling the key areas the enlightened need.
Anyhow, this is good news…better news would of course be a assembler being created however its nice to hear that even without one, hope isn't completely lost…
however, again, without a assembler, wouldn't their be a population crisis if people no longer died? Does anyone have a backup plan for materials and resources in this senario if the assembler falls under the sceptics belief that its impossible?
Solar farming
Mining Mars/Moon/Venus/asteroids
Space colonys
those are some however we could be already in serious trouble by the time these things are in place…
or we could just keep dying I guess
which is not the happy option
ok, I wrote another book…sorry about that…
Me
November 17th, 2000 at 10:33 AM
Re:Vitrification for Biostasis
A few quick answers…just my own personal opinions…
>1 How long do you figure it will take for someone to revive a mammal (lets say a mouse) using this technique?
Not for a long time, in all likelyhood. But remember, we only need to do a good job at the "front end". It is not necessary to know 100% how to revive to make cryonics a rational gamble.
>2 If they can accomplish the first question, do you think that Cryo-burials will become more mainstream than they are now?
Not by much, I think. Alcor has only 500 or so members. Even if it had 50,000, it would still be out of the main stream. Of course, with 50,000 members, Alcor would be in much better shape.
>only thing is, without "dry" nanotech, would we be coming back only to die again?
IIRC, you can make this a requirement for revival.
>Does Alcor have a marketing department? If not then shouldn't they?
They are putting one together now (and accepting directed donations for it…hint, hint) But remember that while Alcor has been in exhistance for nearly 30 years, it has never had more than a handful of (horribly overworked) employees. The just don't have the resources for a "department".
>Do you think hospitals will offer this service to the dying soon so not to waste precious time before brain damage starts to occur?
It is all we can do to get hospitals to not actively interfere. With enough money, maybe…
>I am worried that I would pay for cryo-stasis only to rot in a hospital someday because the hospital didn't know the technique to suspend me…seems like good money gone to waste where it could have been passed down to my family.
It is generally not the hospital, but Alcor employees and contractors that do the work. Sometimes, in emergency situations, hospitals can be persuaded to administer some common medications, but not always. This is why it is so important to make arrangements in advance of any illness…cryonics takes a lot of prior planning.
Also, you can specify that, if for some reason you cannot be suspended, your funding will go to your family (or anyone else for that matter).
>wouldn't their be a population crisis if people no longer died?
There will eventually be a population crisis of some sort anyhow, so long as there is exponential population growth. Mathematically, "not dying" makes little difference in the long run.
steve van sickle
November 19th, 2000 at 1:18 PM
Re:Vitrification for Biostasis
Such a thing has been proposed, by Robert Ettinger if memory serves. He suggested an arrangement of nested annular chambers. The innermost chamber contains liquid nitrogen with a predictable temperature or -170C. The next chamber, moving outward, is a thermal resistor. The third chamber is a storage area. The fourth is another thermal resistor, and the outer surface of the fourth chamber is at ambient room temperature. By a little cleverness in designing the shapes and thicknesses of the second and fourth chambers, it's easy to design a thermal version of a voltage divider that keeps the third chamber in the -135C to -140C range. It might be desirable to use nested spheres rather than nested annuli. The temperature in the third chamber should be fairly insensitive to variations in ambient room temperature.
November 24th, 2000 at 12:24 AM
Re:Vitrification for Biostasis
>There will eventually be a population crisis of some sort anyhow, so long as there is exponential population growth. Mathematically, "not dying" makes little difference in the long run.
=How is that then? If we have 6 billion on the planet now and estimated 10 billion in 100 years, we can accomidate because without nanotech or any other massive breakthrough, we would be able to expand on what we have present…GM and all…but if nobody died, we are talking 16 billion people…I would say that its the short term that is the problem…long term we might have a hope if we eventually get a assembler or some other such device that solves resource problem, but we wont make it to their if we strip the earth (more).
Perhaps we can really make a effort for underground farming using massive UV lights…or something…Space farms seems unlikely (not very cost effective and too much radiation I would think). Definately need a plentyful replacement for wood at this point also…what burns well(ans smells ok), builds well,is common and wont effect the ecosystem if harvested???
Why is their never a easy solution for our species???
Saturn
November 26th, 2000 at 6:53 PM
Population Problem
I really think that when we are able to remain physoilogically 25 years old indefinitely, that most of us are going to live like we are 25 years old indefinitely. Most people are going to work and play hard, travel, and party alot. Most people are not going to bother with getting married and having kids, at least not before they become independently wealthy first. I, for one, have no desire to have kids and live the "family life". In fact, the reason why I'm into life-extension is because I want to live like a young person forever. It's more fun! I want to be an immortal party-animal. Everyone else I know who wants to live forever wants to be able to live the young and free life forever. Thats why we want immortality in the first place! Thats why there's not going to be an over-population problem. In fact, the most significant social impact of immortality will be to turn the world (and the solar system) into a "party zone". Also, nanotech is going to make it much easier to make O'niell-style space colonies. Instead of building them, you grow 'em. My thinking is that the solar system wide population will probably be around 20billion around 2200. maybe 8-10billion on Earth (afterall it IS the cultural center of the solar syatem) and another 10billion through-out the solar system, in O'niell habitats or whatever that comes that offers even better living. The point is that over-population is not going to be a problem.