• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

Organ donation and cryonics


  • Please log in to reply
56 replies to this topic

Poll: Cryonics and Organ Donation (5 member(s) have cast votes)

Will you sign up for organ donation as a cryonicist and withdraw from the program to add an incentive for the cryonics and organ donation industries to work together?

  1. Yes (1 votes [20.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 20.00%

  2. No (4 votes [80.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 80.00%

  3. Already have (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  4. I'm afraid it won't go as planned. (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#31 Antonio2014

  • Guest
  • 634 posts
  • 52
  • Location:Spain
  • NO

Posted 07 May 2016 - 08:20 PM

You prefer a new body. I prefer my own body aging backwards to my 20's-30's.

 

[..]

 

In my urrent belief reviving the whole body is with a higher chance of happening, because it happens today. In the reanimation rooms in the hospitals all over the world there are currently revived fresh death people.

 

Cryonics patients are mostly old people with multiorgan failure. They can't simply be rewarmed and survive for several months while SENS 3.0 rejuvenates them. Also, most probably, these treatments will be too aggressive for a very old person (think, for example, in senolytics: if you kill too much senescent cells too fast, you spread a big amount of garbage in the blood, and probably the person will die). People reanimated today are relatively young and healthy, and have died of some accident (drowning, heart attack, etc.).

 

Thus, in most cases, you need to molecularly repair the cryonics patient before rewarming.


Edited by Antonio2014, 07 May 2016 - 08:35 PM.

  • Agree x 1

#32 Danail Bulgaria

  • Guest
  • 2,212 posts
  • 421
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 08 May 2016 - 12:48 PM

Steps can be broken into substeps.

 

Thawing may be dissolved to Repairing the damage from the ice formation + repairing the damage because of the cryoprotectants + pure increase of the temperature.

But this does not influence the comaprison. It is still the same for both of the options. We are comapreing whole body V/S head only cryopreservation.

Repairing the damage from the ice formation + repairing the damage because of the cryoprotectants relies on the same (nano)technologies for the future therefore it is the same chance of happening no matter what of the both options you will rely on.

 

 

 

It is true, that the chance of reanimation also depends on your age and the diagnose you died from, but even today it is not an absolute true, that only young people get reanimated.

To calculate what chancesare there for you to be reanimated, you have to know what are you going to die from. And this makes the calculations tricky. However, even if you die from chronic diseases at an old age and even if you have a polyorgan failure, you still may be temporary reanimated, or fall into a reanimating status where you will periodically die and will have to be periodically reanimated, something like a constant battle for your life that may last hours even days. It is a medical heroism nowadays, but not impossible.

 

In the best case it will provide enough time for the medics of the future to stabilize you temporary (I imagine it with automatic reanimating machines, external artifitial organ devices to temporary replace your organs functions such as artifitial heart - exists now, artifitial kidney - haemodialisis aparatus - exists now -2016, and devices, that are not existing today, but are in some sort of development, such as an artifitial lungs and artifitial liver). Once stabilized, you will be able to wait for the "several months while SENS 3.0" rejuvenates you.



#33 YOLF

  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 08 May 2016 - 11:02 PM

I think that is getting off topic, I don't see what it all has to do with organ preservation unless you are illustrating the challenges... But even then, I don't see how it wouldn't be easier with fewer tissue types to achieve a better preservation. Look at the kidney preservations that were done... sacrifices had to be made in some areas to improve outcomes in others. If we're separating the brain and replacing harvesting the organs for immediate transplant, everything gets used and the process is simplified to only preserving the brain and maybe a few other tissues.

 

If Ira Pastor is correct that the brain dead can be rejuvenated and are still viable, then organ donation as we know it may have to end. Is it ethical for someone who can be rejuvenated to be scrapped for parts if they are not to be rejuvenated? 



#34 Antonio2014

  • Guest
  • 634 posts
  • 52
  • Location:Spain
  • NO

Posted 08 May 2016 - 11:33 PM

Well, I think that artificial organ creation will arrive sooner than popularization of cryonics.

 

Anyway, I still have serious doubts about the compatibility of cryonics and organ donation. How will you do it?


Edited by Antonio2014, 08 May 2016 - 11:34 PM.


#35 YOLF

  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 09 May 2016 - 12:34 AM

Cryonics will become popular when it is presented as an option for organ donors. Organ donation is already substantiated, so getting their people to develop and approve it, even if only as a possibility, would lead to wider acceptance and consideration. As with anything, we all benefit when we work together.It's a network thing.



#36 Antonio2014

  • Guest
  • 634 posts
  • 52
  • Location:Spain
  • NO

Posted 09 May 2016 - 09:38 AM

You don't need cryonics to donate your organs, so I don't see how cryonics can become popular that way. Even less if you consider the compatibility problems I stated above.



#37 Danail Bulgaria

  • Guest
  • 2,212 posts
  • 421
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 09 May 2016 - 11:49 AM

There is a possible way actually the cryopreservation to help the organs donation. It is however not harvesting organs from cryonics patients, but finding a way to cryopreserve entire human organs from donors, which organs thus to be made to last until needed. 


  • Agree x 1

#38 YOLF

  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 09 May 2016 - 04:26 PM

You don't need cryonics to donate your organs, so I don't see how cryonics can become popular that way. Even less if you consider the compatibility problems I stated above.

 

I'm just not seeing that the compatibility problems will remain... They are there now, yes, but they don't have to be. We can overcome them. Why are you giving up?

 

One of the biggest hurdles to cryonics is price. If you knew that you could get a high grade, lower cost cryopreservation through an organ donation company who you trust, you might be more likely to get it or give it a try. I'm not sure how you're missing that...



#39 YOLF

  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 09 May 2016 - 04:31 PM

There is a possible way actually the cryopreservation to help the organs donation. It is however not harvesting organs from cryonics patients, but finding a way to cryopreserve entire human organs from donors, which organs thus to be made to last until needed. 

 

And we'll get that done too. But even then, by the time it becomes available, it may only last a few years before we're printing organs. There is no one answer. Organ preservation is one thing and it can save some lives, but making cryonics compatible with organ donation can improve 116k lives and save as many as 16k. It might also become available more readily than organ cryopreservation.



#40 YOLF

  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 09 May 2016 - 05:51 PM

I've added a poll. 



#41 Antonio2014

  • Guest
  • 634 posts
  • 52
  • Location:Spain
  • NO

Posted 09 May 2016 - 06:46 PM

I'm just not seeing that the compatibility problems will remain... They are there now, yes, but they don't have to be. We can overcome them. Why are you giving up?

 

I simply asked how those problems could be solved, but you didn't reply. Since you are promoting organ donation for cryonics organizations, you should provide (at least some crude form of) a solution.

 

One of the biggest hurdles to cryonics is price. If you knew that you could get a high grade, lower cost cryopreservation through an organ donation company who you trust, you might be more likely to get it or give it a try. I'm not sure how you're missing that...

 

In most countries, organs can't be sold. Until 2013 or so, only Iran allowed organ trade. Now Australia and Singapore allow financial compensation for living organ donors. Still, the vast majority of countries prohibit it.

 

Organ preservation is one thing and it can save some lives, but making cryonics compatible with organ donation can improve 116k lives and save as many as 16k.

 

I can't see why, since only around 300 people have been cryopreserved worldwide since the 1960's and most of them couldn't be donors anyway due to age or cause of death.
 


Edited by Antonio2014, 09 May 2016 - 06:55 PM.


#42 Danail Bulgaria

  • Guest
  • 2,212 posts
  • 421
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 09 May 2016 - 07:53 PM

 

There is a possible way actually the cryopreservation to help the organs donation. It is however not harvesting organs from cryonics patients, but finding a way to cryopreserve entire human organs from donors, which organs thus to be made to last until needed. 

 

And we'll get that done too. But even then, by the time it becomes available, it may only last a few years before we're printing organs. There is no one answer. Organ preservation is one thing and it can save some lives, but making cryonics compatible with organ donation can improve 116k lives and save as many as 16k. It might also become available more readily than organ cryopreservation.

 

 

3D organs printing changes little for my view of full body cryopreservation.

 

Cryopreserved people will still need their own organs to increase their chance of reanimation.

 

In this case instead of harvesting cryonicists organs, the better way is to make the 3D printed organs faster. 3D printed organs with patient's DNA has the perfect compatability. Those who need organs will have such, and those who are cryopreserved will keep theirs.



#43 YOLF

  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 10 May 2016 - 06:29 PM

 

I'm just not seeing that the compatibility problems will remain... They are there now, yes, but they don't have to be. We can overcome them. Why are you giving up?

 

I simply asked how those problems could be solved, but you didn't reply. Since you are promoting organ donation for cryonics organizations, you should provide (at least some crude form of) a solution.

 

One of the biggest hurdles to cryonics is price. If you knew that you could get a high grade, lower cost cryopreservation through an organ donation company who you trust, you might be more likely to get it or give it a try. I'm not sure how you're missing that...

 

In most countries, organs can't be sold. Until 2013 or so, only Iran allowed organ trade. Now Australia and Singapore allow financial compensation for living organ donors. Still, the vast majority of countries prohibit it.

 

Organ preservation is one thing and it can save some lives, but making cryonics compatible with organ donation can improve 116k lives and save as many as 16k.

 

I can't see why, since only around 300 people have been cryopreserved worldwide since the 1960's and most of them couldn't be donors anyway due to age or cause of death.
 

 

 

What's eating me here is that you seem to want to say no. I have offered a crude example of procedural changes. Instead of keeping the patient alive in a brain dead state, we'd be harvesting them all at once and the patient's "death" would be voluntary. We can aerate and enrich the perfusate with the necessary chemistry and use an artificial heart pump. We're humans and we're smart... there is literally nothing we can't do if we put our minds to it. I believe that. It just take the right people thinking about it and I'm talking more about the ethics than the technical aspects. IIRC, Max Moore said something along the lines of the body being just a convenient apparatus for preserving the head. That would infer that there are other known options, though perhaps they will require more investment. The fact of the matter is however that the donor wishes to be a cryonicist, so their wishes need to be accommodated if you're to take their organs. 

 

I'm not saying that Alcor sell organs, nor are you looking at organ sales from the right angle. There is a cost to the organ to the insurance company and provider that is installing it. In the same way, the costs for cryopatient organs might just be a little higher to accommodate our wishes. No organs are being sold in any way that they aren't already and neuropreservation could be provided as a matter of course if I'm using the phrase right. Similarly, the remains of an organ donor is also disposed of for free or at a reduced cost. So looking at things from that perspective there is no selling of organs being done by organ donors or organ donation companies that are providing organs.

 

Maybe there's something else going on here... but I'm not one to put my trust in promises (it's genetic), so you'll have to put that in writing for me.



#44 YOLF

  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 10 May 2016 - 06:31 PM

 

 

There is a possible way actually the cryopreservation to help the organs donation. It is however not harvesting organs from cryonics patients, but finding a way to cryopreserve entire human organs from donors, which organs thus to be made to last until needed. 

 

And we'll get that done too. But even then, by the time it becomes available, it may only last a few years before we're printing organs. There is no one answer. Organ preservation is one thing and it can save some lives, but making cryonics compatible with organ donation can improve 116k lives and save as many as 16k. It might also become available more readily than organ cryopreservation.

 

 

3D organs printing changes little for my view of full body cryopreservation.

 

Cryopreserved people will still need their own organs to increase their chance of reanimation.

 

In this case instead of harvesting cryonicists organs, the better way is to make the 3D printed organs faster. 3D printed organs with patient's DNA has the perfect compatability. Those who need organs will have such, and those who are cryopreserved will keep theirs.

 

 

These organs could still be as much as 30 years from broad implementation. In the mean time, the discarded bits and pieces of neuropatients could be used by someone else.



#45 Danail Bulgaria

  • Guest
  • 2,212 posts
  • 421
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 10 May 2016 - 07:57 PM

I saw another problem for organ donation for "neuro" patients. 

Taking the vital organs from the cryonicist's body will take time, which will allow after death changes to take place in a higher degree. 

 

Plus I found a contradiction

Cryonics is allowed only after death, right? 

And as far as I know, organ donation is volunteery, right? 

Then the view, that cryonics patients, who save only their head or brain to give their organs is already implemented. 

Those cryonics "patients", who have agreed their organs to be donated after death, will have them donated after their death. Those, who do not want to donate their organs, won't donate them. 



#46 Antonio2014

  • Guest
  • 634 posts
  • 52
  • Location:Spain
  • NO

Posted 10 May 2016 - 08:58 PM

What's eating me here is that you seem to want to say no. I have offered a crude example of procedural changes. Instead of keeping the patient alive in a brain dead state, we'd be harvesting them all at once and the patient's "death" would be voluntary. We can aerate and enrich the perfusate with the necessary chemistry and use an artificial heart pump.

 

And what's eating me here is that you seem to not wanting to provide any reason why this is possible and useful. What is "an artificial heart pump"? If you refer to a CPR machine, like the ones used now for cryonics procedures, they need a working natural heart. If you refer to an artificial heart like these ones, the cryopatient candidate would probably not endure the surgery, and it will be a waste of money. And you still didn't account for the main problems here:

 

- Huge number of broken blood vessels due to organ extraction, just before cryopreservation. Massive internal bleeding is not the "best" condition to perfuse a cryopatient. How will you seal all the vessels fast enough and safely enough?

 

- A huge percentage of cryopatient candidates that are very bad candidates for donation (old and sick). The NIH would reject them in seconds.

 

 

I'm not saying that Alcor sell organs, nor are you looking at organ sales from the right angle. There is a cost to the organ to the insurance company and provider that is installing it. In the same way, the costs for cryopatient organs might just be a little higher to accommodate our wishes. No organs are being sold in any way that they aren't already and neuropreservation could be provided as a matter of course if I'm using the phrase right. Similarly, the remains of an organ donor is also disposed of for free or at a reduced cost. So looking at things from that perspective there is no selling of organs being done by organ donors or organ donation companies that are providing organs.

 

Neither Alcor nor the insurance company will receive money for the donation, and organs aren't provided by companies, so this is nonsense.
 


Edited by Antonio2014, 10 May 2016 - 09:00 PM.


#47 YOLF

  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 10 May 2016 - 09:42 PM

I saw another problem for organ donation for "neuro" patients. 

Taking the vital organs from the cryonicist's body will take time, which will allow after death changes to take place in a higher degree. 

 

Plus I found a contradiction

Cryonics is allowed only after death, right? 

And as far as I know, organ donation is volunteery, right? 

Then the view, that cryonics patients, who save only their head or brain to give their organs is already implemented. 

Those cryonics "patients", who have agreed their organs to be donated after death, will have them donated after their death. Those, who do not want to donate their organs, won't donate them. 

 

Not necessarily, if the head is first to come off and the rest is parted out immediately, it shouldn't represent a problem, they probably won't have to even cool the organs, just walk them down the hall to the patient who is already opened up and ready to receive it.

 

Do we have to accept that? I don't want to be brain dead and I shouldn't have to suffer in order to die. It should be on my terms. I'm of the opinion that this having to wait until I'm legally dead thing is a violation of my human rights. I have to endure the torture of old age and deterioration in order to give someone my organs? That's pretty sick... There are some politicians out there that need some mental health and interrogation by the UN...

 

Yes, at least in the US, it is voluntary. I wouldn't call it implemented already... nothing can be done with your organs after your head is cryopreserved. In any case, we'd see alot of developmental benefits by working together that would bring reversible cryonics much closer and we'd be incentivizing organ donation. It makes alot of sense to do it this way.



#48 YOLF

  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 10 May 2016 - 09:44 PM

 

What's eating me here is that you seem to want to say no. I have offered a crude example of procedural changes. Instead of keeping the patient alive in a brain dead state, we'd be harvesting them all at once and the patient's "death" would be voluntary. We can aerate and enrich the perfusate with the necessary chemistry and use an artificial heart pump.

 

And what's eating me here is that you seem to not wanting to provide any reason why this is possible and useful. What is "an artificial heart pump"? If you refer to a CPR machine, like the ones used now for cryonics procedures, they need a working natural heart. If you refer to an artificial heart like these ones, the cryopatient candidate would probably not endure the surgery, and it will be a waste of money. And you still didn't account for the main problems here:

 

- Huge number of broken blood vessels due to organ extraction, just before cryopreservation. Massive internal bleeding is not the "best" condition to perfuse a cryopatient. How will you seal all the vessels fast enough and safely enough?

 

- A huge percentage of cryopatient candidates that are very bad candidates for donation (old and sick). The NIH would reject them in seconds.

 

 

There are a ton of artificial heart pumps, the most well known one is probably the Jarvic Artificial Heart. I've provided several moral incentives to doing it this way and one can naturally project that this would be beneficial for the development of both industries.

 

Sealing blood vessels? A guillotine device and laser cauterization for both sides of the "equation?"

 

Rejected patients? Ok, so not all would be good candidates, but some could be, and allowing us to go when we're younger would be of benefit to organ recipients and cryonicists alike, so we'd be doing cryonics voluntarily and early enough to get a good preservation. 


Edited by YOLF, 10 May 2016 - 09:48 PM.


#49 Danail Bulgaria

  • Guest
  • 2,212 posts
  • 421
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 10 May 2016 - 09:54 PM

The transplantologists will find a way for the cryonicist's organs to be harvested technically. 

 

And I agree, that it will be best if you are being cryopreserved while still alive. And I also understand, that cryonics should be viewd as a legal euthanasia option. 

 

Yet, I still believe, that the cryonicist will need his organs to increase his chance of success. 



#50 YOLF

  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 10 May 2016 - 09:56 PM

 

 

I'm not saying that Alcor sell organs, nor are you looking at organ sales from the right angle. There is a cost to the organ to the insurance company and provider that is installing it. In the same way, the costs for cryopatient organs might just be a little higher to accommodate our wishes. No organs are being sold in any way that they aren't already and neuropreservation could be provided as a matter of course if I'm using the phrase right. Similarly, the remains of an organ donor is also disposed of for free or at a reduced cost. So looking at things from that perspective there is no selling of organs being done by organ donors or organ donation companies that are providing organs.

 

Neither Alcor nor the insurance company will receive money for the donation, and organs aren't provided by companies, so this is nonsense.
 

 

 

I'm talking about the health insurance companies of the organ recipient. They are literally paying for the organ whether there is low overhead or not. It's just moving the figures around. Whether the organ line item is zero or has a figure, it's still being bought. It's like getting free shipping... it's not really free, the cost is built into the profits of the other line items or things that you're buying. Organ sales prohibition in the regular sense are to prevent people from being exploited. Basically, so you can't use the poor and young as cash cows. In the case of cryonics this is not the case, you are getting a shot at being young again, and you already want cryonics and a good cryopreservation. So you go out younger, you get an optimal cryopreservation with more uniform perfusion and your organs are more likely to save/improve some lives and because the industries are working together, we're more likely to develop the technology to bring you back. It's about two industries learning from each other.


Edited by YOLF, 10 May 2016 - 09:58 PM.


#51 YOLF

  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 10 May 2016 - 10:00 PM

The transplantologists will find a way for the cryonicist's organs to be harvested technically. 

 

And I agree, that it will be best if you are being cryopreserved while still alive. And I also understand, that cryonics should be viewd as a legal euthanasia option. 

 

Yet, I still believe, that the cryonicist will need his organs to increase his chance of success. 

 

That sounds reasonable, but I don't want to wake up with old organs, so I'd rather wait for technology that can give me new ones.



#52 elfanjo

  • Guest
  • 73 posts
  • 4
  • Location:Canada

Posted 11 May 2016 - 08:27 PM

Canada is thinking about assisted death, it is not that far from the CI site.
In Europe we have Switzerland but you need a good reason in order to get it.

I feel that going for assisted death young is too much of a gamble if you want to be cryopreserved. I mean ATM you don't know if you get to be thawed, you don't know if it is going to work, you need a printed body and all..

I keep thinking about what would need to be known for that to be viable.
If we have the technology why not print or grow organs instead of using donors

Full body preservation for me :)

Edited by elfanjo, 11 May 2016 - 08:29 PM.

  • Agree x 1

#53 Antonio2014

  • Guest
  • 634 posts
  • 52
  • Location:Spain
  • NO

Posted 11 May 2016 - 09:26 PM

I feel that going for assisted death young is too much of a gamble if you want to be cryopreserved. I mean ATM you don't know if you get to be thawed, you don't know if it is going to work, you need a printed body and all..

I keep thinking about what would need to be known for that to be viable.

You have all the time in the world to wait.



#54 YOLF

  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 12 May 2016 - 02:21 AM

Canada is thinking about assisted death, it is not that far from the CI site.
In Europe we have Switzerland but you need a good reason in order to get it.

I feel that going for assisted death young is too much of a gamble if you want to be cryopreserved. I mean ATM you don't know if you get to be thawed, you don't know if it is going to work, you need a printed body and all..

I keep thinking about what would need to be known for that to be viable.
If we have the technology why not print or grow organs instead of using donors

Full body preservation for me :)

 

We are printing new organs, and they work. They just aren't FDA approved yet, give it 15-20 years and give full body bioprinting another 20 on top of that if you're an optimist. But there is a need today, and getting old isn't all that attractive to some of us. Getting cryo'd at an old age with lots of sclerosis and Alzheimer's on the other hand may lead to more extensive brain damage. I'd rather take my chances early.



#55 Danail Bulgaria

  • Guest
  • 2,212 posts
  • 421
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 12 May 2016 - 07:29 PM

Really? Is printing working organs a fact? What organs are being printed? Are there hearts, lungs, kidneys and livers? I thought, that there is at least half a century to that. Can you post some links?


  • Agree x 1

#56 YOLF

  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 12 May 2016 - 08:06 PM

I don't have any links at hand, but from what I've read they have fully working mini kidneys as of a few months ago, so they just need to scale up I guess. They've already been using heart valves or some such thing... maybe it was a trachea? But some very simple stuff is already in use and made from the patient's own cells and then they have the livers and kidneys that are being demonstrated. It's all just a matter of getting these scientists funded.



#57 Danail Bulgaria

  • Guest
  • 2,212 posts
  • 421
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 12 May 2016 - 08:14 PM

Are you talking about my topic for the stem cells things, that have been tried on people? :)

 

http://www.longecity...used-on-people/

 

3D printing of vital organs from stem cells is a good will for now (2015-2016).

 

This has to be speeded up. This is the correct solving of the organs shortage.


  • Agree x 1




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users