33 replies to this topic

[YOLF]

 

They did the procedure a bunch of times and one of them succeeded.

False. They did the procedure with different perfusion pressures, to see which one works better. Only one additional rabbit was perfused with the same pressure as the successful one. That is a 50% success rate, not one on a buch.

 

 

it's still not known what made this one work and all the rest of them fail.

 

False again. It's pressure. Read the paper before critizicing the experiment. They said it on the 2nd page.

 

 

That rabbit might have had some mutation the rest didn't. It's hard to tell.

 

Yeah, it's hard to tell when you don't read the paper.

 

 

Maybe they put the same kidney back in that they took back out without knowing it...

 

Or maybe you didn't read the part when they say that all the trasplants were autotrasplants. It's the same page and paragraph as above.

 

Also, two points:

 

(1) The failure of the kidneys were due to imperfect devitrification, not vitrification. Ice appeared in some zones while warming the kidney. So, this doesn't mean that current vitrification procedures in humans are wrong and thus cryonics is useless. They only mean that we can't safely devitrify a human yet (but all the people in cryonics organizations know that).

 

(2) Even if devitrification failure rate were high in this paper, you don't really expect the first stages of a new technology development to be perfect, don't you?

 

 

All that over the difference in two rabbits, but it's still just one rabbit that was successful, so duplicate the study and see how many out of 100 are successful or if the success was a fluke or mistake. At this point, we're still grasping for something in desperation or hope rather than being able to expect results. We can also see that organ systems may all need different pressures and different solutions or permutations of the solution. A kidney is still one organ. This hardly demonstrates that a system wide success can be achieved.

 

Demonstrate the improved technologies... that's what people want. The more frequently we demonstrate success or at least progress, the more cryonics will catch on with the skeptics. Until then... they'll be skeptics and we won't be getting enough patients to ramp up operations and speed up the technological developments. 

[Danail Bulgaria]

Wow, I put a lot of arguments and scientific papers to refute plain lies, and your conclusion is that I'm a believer.

 

What a waste of time.

 

Don't get me wrong, Antonio. Just like you I also hope, that cryonics will work out, and I intend to crypreserve myself. The hope and the extend of belief, that I have for the cryonics are enough for me, to choose it for me. The experimental proof, that cryonics is working for people, is crypreserving a human being, and thawing that human being alive successfully. Purely scientifically, everything else is a proof of something else.

[Antonio2014]

So, according to your "reasoning", nuclear fusion power is not science, only belief, since it hasn't been achieved. I wonder why so many countries spend money on it...

 

Seriously, what a waste of time in this debate.

[YOLF]

Lots of countries spend money on lots of things to test ideas and see if something works because the future will be better if they can learn from it. It doesn't mean it's destined to succeed. It probably will, but big things have been built just to try or just to learn that didn't pan out.

 

What we need is a big organization getting behind cryonics and developing it for a charitable purpose. Ettinger imagined it would be this way, but it just hasn't become a reality yet. The best we've done in that regard is freeze some people who couldn't afford it and the Thai two year old mentioned in the Alcor magazine. Developing a persuasive argument and contacting big orgs is on my short list if anyone would like to help. I'm keenly interested in seeing something like this happen and it's the real answer to this thread. Sorry that's the topic was derailed until now, but understanding the research deficit is crucial to understanding what needs to be done next or that we need to work on getting the movement back on track. 

 

Can anyone think of why we aren't already there in that respect? What's been tried to get this developed and why did it fail? 

 

I think we also need to get the CI library back online for people to read if that hasn't already been done. How many cryonicists have read the original books?