207 replies to this topic

[Danail Bulgaria]

How about @Rib Jig 's money factor? 

 

How much money would we need to have in order to become immortal? 

[shadowhawk]

You don't have enough

[Danail Bulgaria]

How about if we think out how can we make it cheaper for us? 

[shadowhawk]

What is "It?"

[Danail Bulgaria]

I think, that the technologies for immortality will be expensive at the beginning, but their costs will drop after the science develops more.

 

This can be a way for makeing it cheaper for us - push the science forward in order to make it cheaper. For example, stem cells afe being isolated on regular bases - think out a way for them to be isolated cheap, then to be stored cheap, and finally to be grown cheap.

[YOLF]

 

> But the initial cost of the commitment would cost as much as $350 million and at $5k would require 70k patients paying in advance.

Only way I can imagine this scenario unfolding is if a predominantly non-religious

socialist country adds state-run cryonics to their existing healthcare & offers an

"opt in" option for $?XXXX? extra one-time payment...?

 

Remote now.  Odds go down with each decade & continuing scientific advances.

It might start being discussed by ?2040? & voted on before 2050????

 

Disappointed to find this on Alcor site today:

 

"Alcor will use its best judgment, considering the amount of funding provided

by the member, to determine the level of care that can be provided."

 

Well, Alcor full body fee in 1982 was $100,000.

Those 1982 dollars = $249,800 2015 dollars.

So to get coverage including today's techniques,

someone paying 1982 fee has to pay $100,000 more = $200,000 total???

If we were to pay $200,000 now & new advances are introduced, this

gives Alcor excuse to require $200,000 more in about 2040!!!!

Even if our 2015 dollars have been invested by Alcor & inflated to $500,000 or whatever...

Kinda greedy, IMO...      

 

That's post thaw care? I imagine bioprinted bodies will be pretty inexpensive. But we're also able to specify the level of care we require at reanimation at either Alcor or CI.

[YOLF]

 

> But the initial cost of the commitment would cost as much as $350 million and at $5k would require 70k patients paying in advance.

Only way I can imagine this scenario unfolding is if a predominantly non-religious

socialist country adds state-run cryonics to their existing healthcare & offers an

"opt in" option for $?XXXX? extra one-time payment...?

 

Remote now.  Odds go down with each decade & continuing scientific advances.

It might start being discussed by ?2040? & voted on before 2050????

 

Disappointed to find this on Alcor site today:

 

"Alcor will use its best judgment, considering the amount of funding provided

by the member, to determine the level of care that can be provided."

 

Well, Alcor full body fee in 1982 was $100,000.

Those 1982 dollars = $249,800 2015 dollars.

So to get coverage including today's techniques,

someone paying 1982 fee has to pay $100,000 more = $200,000 total???

If we were to pay $200,000 now & new advances are introduced, this

gives Alcor excuse to require $200,000 more in about 2040!!!!

Even if our 2015 dollars have been invested by Alcor & inflated to $500,000 or whatever...

Kinda greedy, IMO...      

 

 

It seems the price has also gone down at Alcor relative to inflation. If 100k in 1982 would be worth 250k now and the price is only 200k, the price is going down... There is certainly a need to accelerate the lowering of cost for cryonics though. 200k is still very high considering that I'd like to pay for it up front in cash so I can move on to things like regular stem cell (my own) treatments and not have to worry about getting cancer or some other serious complication that would prevent me from making the life insurance payments or suck up my available funds such that I couldn't afford cryonics anymore. I'd feel much more comfortable with 5k cryonics for the masses and I have a feeling that it will accelerate the willingness of people to do what I'd like to do and thus accelerate the development of better and better technologies...

[YOLF]

The opposite of Death by Government.  Our only hope is the government forcing everyone into it.

 

Shouldn't they though? With the diseases of aging sucking up 95% of the healthcare money spent, wouldn't it be cheaper to cryopreserve everyone until sustainable solutions and age reversal technology could be applied? The savings would pay for itself and leave us much better off.

[YOLF]

 

 

People, come into the reality at last.

 

We are living in the 2015 today.

 

The only way to prevent overpopulation in an immortal society, until other options become possible, is the tactics of not producing more children for the immortals, and taking measures for preventing overpopulating fractions in the countries arround the world. Otherwise you are postphoning the overpopulation at the best, not removing the problem.

 

I don't want to adm it, but so far the only attached to the ground poster in this topic is @Rib Jig

His view is that the rich people will prevent us all in this forum from being immortal.

So the rich will have it an deny it to the rest of us? There is no postponing over population if reproduction must be licenced and is done only when capacity allows. Step back from thinking in the negative and be an optimist. Ask yourself, what does the future need to look like if we want to be a more ethically advanced civilization where death is voluntary and aging doesn't exist? Don't ask if the future as you expect it to be could allow for it. That's assuming human progress has flatlined. The future will be built by those of the present who strive to shape it and who are successful. You won't be successful if you're not making the world a better place.

 

If their is resistance to the idea of ethically superior agelessness and people are against us, it is because those who are against us are mocking us rather than listening and trying to work with us. It may even be that they've already devalued the lives of the human race and don't want to face their mistakes. Just keep envisioning a greater outcome and more solutions. Don't be distracted by the ideas which are being fed to you, find your own solutions, or find better solutions until you have a vision that would succeed. Those who are against us never present a rational argument, just traps which the young and ignorant fall into easily so they can be proven wrong and either absorbed, or sent off as fools to argue for a lost cause instead of being productive about finding the solution using the method I've suggested.

 

 

I am not talking about licensing the overpopulation of the immortals. I am talkiing about laws to stop that overpopulation. You, however sound like if you have a better working solution, that can be applied at any moment for the overpopulation problem. Is it so? Share it, if it is so. Otherwise there is no other way unless to admit, that no children for the immortals is the only feasable option, that can be applied NOW at this very moment in order to stop overpopulation for the immortals. 

 

The rich will have the immortality an deny it to the rest of us is how I understood what @Rib Jig wrote. I hope, that this will not be the case. 

If it happens to be the case, then savings will not rescue you, even if you spend 0 dollars for eating and take all your things from the dumbster. 

 

P.S. What frightens me, is that such a thing may already have started. 

For example, I don't believe, that everybody in this forum can affort the same medical care. 

Also recently I watched a movie, which claimed, that a speciphic ship has sailed in a neutral waters. This ship is crammed with the best medical technologies and personnal, including such, that are not officially allowed. The aim of the ship is to provide the best possible anti aging medical treatments, independent from laws and any other restrictions. The costs for being in the ship are not simply high, not even simply hudge. They are astronomical. If thuis rumor gets confirmed, then will the best treatments be allowed only for the extremely rich, will not be a question anymore. 

 

 

I'm saying one solution, sustainable health (perpetual youth and all that) is the solution we seek to the over population problem. I'm proposing that we aren't looking at the problem from the right angle. We can develop birth control methods and prevent reproduction. It's just a matter of investing in the research. We're too happy with what we've got. We need fertility to be something that happens at the flip of a switch without it affecting libido, then we can control the switch in the form of a gene therapy shot and since we won't be aging or losing our health, everyone born will be healthier, though fewer, without the need for any technology that devalues human life.

 

Hmmm... Well let's bring this ship ashore and get it off the black market and into the light. Shouldn't we all know about such a thing?

[YOLF]

I think, that the technologies for immortality will be expensive at the beginning, but their costs will drop after the science develops more.

 

This can be a way for makeing it cheaper for us - push the science forward in order to make it cheaper. For example, stem cells afe being isolated on regular bases - think out a way for them to be isolated cheap, then to be stored cheap, and finally to be grown cheap.

 

The processes for doing so are already cheap. It's the human resources and the level of profiteering that are expensive. Those costs need to be lowered. It needs to be turned into a home process. A device we can put some of our blood into that will do the rest and communicate with databases and such to get good results. Though there may be other solutions. But increasing the ability to repair genetics and all that will be even cheaper as it will be a one time gene therapy shot or aging vaccine. 

 

I've decided to take a step back though... it always seemed like the problem was easier to solve in the past, but maybe I'm just thinking about it from the wrong direction now... That had occurred to me earlier today. I have to figure out what I was thinking at the time... It's passed my mind :( but I do believe with the right data being collected from various specimens that we could very quickly accelerate the development of our technologies and the accuracy of modelling these things. It's coming back to me now. I'll have to start writing it down and see if it's worth anything.

[Danail Bulgaria]

In brief, you are offering some sort of a genetic fertility switch, that desn't exist at the moment, so it is again futurism, or a scientific belief. Cryopreserved embryos should be enough for reproduction if some of the immortals dies. We again reach to the no children for the immortals strategy, backed up with cryopreserved embryos, which is feasable even for the current moment.

 

For the ship, I watched the information about it in a russian immortality investigating movie. I don't know anything more about that ship. You can watch the movie on youtube:

 

https://www.youtube....h?v=6xfFcj3FB8o

[Rib Jig]

 

"Alcor will use its best judgment, considering the amount of funding provided

by the member, to determine the level of care that can be provided."

 

That's post thaw care?

No!  Refers to earlier vs. latest cryopreservation preparation techniques AFAICT from Alcor website!!

[YOLF]

In brief, you are offering some sort of a genetic fertility switch, that desn't exist at the moment, so it is again futurism, or a scientific belief. Cryopreserved embryos should be enough for reproduction if some of the immortals dies. We again reach to the no children for the immortals strategy, backed up with cryopreserved embryos, which is feasable even for the current moment.

 

For the ship, I watched the information about it in a russian immortality investigating movie. I don't know anything more about that ship. You can watch the movie on youtube:

 

https://www.youtube....h?v=6xfFcj3FB8o

 

Still, adhering better to modern daily birth control pills or charting in the mean time could easily bridge the gap and get us to better technologies. 

 

There are a list of other alternatives.

 

The show doesn't look like it's too far ahead of what's already available to everyone else, but it may be a bit expensive. I saw a guy getting his VOMAX tested, and a woman getting botox injections... it's routine stuff, but it's also a cruise, and you can get dental work and cosmetic surgery done overseas at much lower prices... it just requires travel accommodations. I'll have to keep watching and see what else they have.  

[Danail Bulgaria]

If you want to do the "no children for the immortals" strategy with birth control pills or with condoms,it is fine, as long as it works. Nothing hesitates laws to be made to enforce no children for the immortals, once when the immortality becomes possible.  

 

The talking on the background claims what I wrote previously - the best possible treatments, including the non accepted ones, for hudge money.

[Rib Jig]

 

> But the initial cost of the commitment would cost as much as $350 million and at $5k would require 70k patients paying in advance.

Only way I can imagine this scenario unfolding is if a predominantly non-religious

socialist country adds state-run cryonics to their existing healthcare & offers an

"opt in" option for $?XXXX? extra one-time payment...?

 

Remote now.  Odds go down with each decade & continuing scientific advances.

It might start being discussed by ?2040? & voted on before 2050????

 

Disappointed to find this on Alcor site today:

 

"Alcor will use its best judgment, considering the amount of funding provided

by the member, to determine the level of care that can be provided."

 

Well, Alcor full body fee in 1982 was $100,000.

Those 1982 dollars = $249,800 2015 dollars.

So to get coverage including today's techniques,

someone paying 1982 fee has to pay $100,000 more = $200,000 total???

If we were to pay $200,000 now & new advances are introduced, this

gives Alcor excuse to require $200,000 more in about 2040!!!!

Even if our 2015 dollars have been invested by Alcor & inflated to $500,000 or whatever...

Kinda greedy, IMO...      

 

 

It seems the price has also gone down at Alcor relative to inflation. If 100k in 1982 would be worth 250k now and the price is only 200k, the price is going down... There is certainly a need to accelerate the lowering of cost for cryonics though. 200k is still very high considering that I'd like to pay for it up front in cash so I can move on to things like regular stem cell (my own) treatments and not have to worry about getting cancer or some other serious complication that would prevent me from making the life insurance payments or suck up my available funds such that I couldn't afford cryonics anymore. I'd feel much more comfortable with 5k cryonics for the masses and I have a feeling that it will accelerate the willingness of people to do what I'd like to do and thus accelerate the development of better and better technologies...

 

[Rib Jig]

> I'd feel much more comfortable with $5K cryonics for the masses...

 

How comfortable is this???!!!

a. buy a cemetery plot in Nome Alaska (temperatures ?always? under freezing)

b. relocate there prior to death

c. be buried there wrapped in polar bear resistant Hefty Garbage Bags

d. leave message at grave to be revived when technology allows

 

All this can be accomplished for under ?$1K?!!!!!!!

 THAT'S CHEAP!

 YEAH, BUT THAT'S SLOPPY CHEAP!

 NOT MUCH SLOPPIER THAN CI...

Edited by Rib Jig, 10 October 2015 - 07:37 PM.

[shadowhawk]

 

The opposite of Death by Government.  Our only hope is the government forcing everyone into it.

 

Shouldn't they though? With the diseases of aging sucking up 95% of the healthcare money spent, wouldn't it be cheaper to cryopreserve everyone until sustainable solutions and age reversal technology could be applied? The savings would pay for itself and leave us much better off.

 

What, death, life, disease, freeze us, all determined by the government?  What do you think would happen if they voted on it today?  Lets have a dictatorship along with our life.  As long as you think right, life for you.  What an interesting future.

 

[shadowhawk]

If you want to do the "no children for the immortals" strategy with birth control pills or with condoms,it is fine, as long as it works. Nothing hesitates laws to be made to enforce no children for the immortals, once when the immortality becomes possible.  

 

The talking on the background claims what I wrote previously - the best possible treatments, including the non accepted ones, for hudge money.

Sounds like China.  Now they want in our bedrooms.   No kids for you and you have to only have sex this way.

[Danail Bulgaria]

Only if you want to be immortal. If not, have children.

Otherwise there will be overpopulation.

 

Do you have a better working strategy, that can be applied at any moment?

 

[shadowhawk]

What if I want to be immortal and have immortal children too?  Someone had you.

[Rib Jig]

>....there will be overpopulation.

> Do you have a better working strategy, that can be applied at any moment?

The moment: 2100

All mankind has enough food.

All mankind has sufficient shelter & space.

All mankind has sufficient health.

Therefore "Overpopulation" does not exist except

in the minds of those fixated on population or

bitter because wealth still dictates choice limitations...

 

Overpopulation, regardless of population count,

will become, by 2100, what the buggy whip became

after Henry Ford's assembly line...

[Rib Jig]

What if I want to be immortal and have immortal children too?

You can have it.  You can have it all, if you keep in mind...

Financial fruitfulness ---> IUF (immortal universal fruitfulness)

Edited by Rib Jig, 10 October 2015 - 08:21 PM.

[YOLF]

If you want to do the "no children for the immortals" strategy with birth control pills or with condoms,it is fine, as long as it works. Nothing hesitates laws to be made to enforce no children for the immortals, once when the immortality becomes possible.  

 

The talking on the background claims what I wrote previously - the best possible treatments, including the non accepted ones, for hudge money.

 

I wouldn't call it "no children for the immortals," that sounds like someone will never have a family of their own if they want to be immortal... that's not the case... they will just have to live longer in order to have them to allow for the infrastructure to allow their kids to live forever should they chose to (which they probably will). So for a better term, I'd call it "indefinitely postponed parenthood." 

 

It's huge, not "hudge."  

 

As for the technologies used on the ship, some stuff gets FDA approved some stuff doesn't, and that's might be b/c there wasn't enough incentive to put it through the process in the US and it's already approved for use elsewhere. It's not necessarily an unethical treatment such as embryonic stem cells or that kind of thing.

[YOLF]

> I'd feel much more comfortable with $5K cryonics for the masses...

 

How comfortable is this???!!!

a. buy a cemetery plot in Nome Alaska (temperatures ?always? under freezing)

b. relocate there prior to death

c. be buried there wrapped in polar bear resistant Hefty Garbage Bags

d. leave message at grave to be revived when technology allows

 

All this can be accomplished for under ?$1K?!!!!!!!

 THAT'S CHEAP!

 YEAH, BUT THAT'S SLOPPY CHEAP!

 NOT MUCH SLOPPIER THAN CI...

 

You need to read the proposal. It's assembly line medicine where the doc does one procedure after the other, the rest of the savings are from the LN2 and you will still have a small portion of a fund that will be for your reanimation at some time in the future, or you can add to it for more. You only need to earn a dollar or two in interest to pay for upkeep and storage.Then it's just making sure the facility can pay its taxes and all that. This could all be paid by the interest generated on a fund that would be setup for the facility to ensure that it would be able to run indefinitely. A portion of each patient's fee going towards setting up the next facility to ensure that it can also run indefinitely, and that makes it sustainable as we'll want to be able to fit more than 70k people into cryopreservation.

 

But yeah, it's not sloppy, it just requires alot of people to sign up so we can get started.

[YOLF]

 

 

The opposite of Death by Government.  Our only hope is the government forcing everyone into it.

 

Shouldn't they though? With the diseases of aging sucking up 95% of the healthcare money spent, wouldn't it be cheaper to cryopreserve everyone until sustainable solutions and age reversal technology could be applied? The savings would pay for itself and leave us much better off.

 

What, death, life, disease, freeze us, all determined by the government?  What do you think would happen if they voted on it today?  Lets have a dictatorship along with our life.  As long as you think right, life for you.  What an interesting future.

 

 

Ok, so we'd make it optional for those who can afford to live and suffer or who can provide a sufficient contribution. But remember that by sucking up that 95% of healthcare, you're taking the resources from someone else or from disease research for a non aging dependent disease, most of which will be children's diseases. Do you want to do that?

[YOLF]

What if I want to be immortal and have immortal children too?  Someone had you.

 

You just have to wait enough time to get a license or for their to be enough anticipated resources before you can get started.

 

Of course, some might want twins etc. So they'd be able to hold their licenses until they could have several or find partners with as many licenses as they had or more, and then do so given that the futures technology will probably allow for this kind of thing. 

[YOLF]

 

>....there will be overpopulation.

> Do you have a better working strategy, that can be applied at any moment?

The moment: 2100

All mankind has enough food.

All mankind has sufficient shelter & space.

All mankind has sufficient health.

Therefore "Overpopulation" does not exist except

in the minds of those fixated on population or

bitter because wealth still dictates choice limitations...

 

Overpopulation, regardless of population count,

will become, by 2100, what the buggy whip became

after Henry Ford's assembly line...

 

 

I hadn't heard this yet. Do you have a reference? How can you be certain? I've heard a lot of ideas to the contrary...

[YOLF]

 

What if I want to be immortal and have immortal children too?

You can have it.  You can have it all, if you keep in mind...

Financial fruitfulness ---> IUF (immortal universal fruitfulness)

 

 

So in other words, only the 1% will get to reproduce? Well at least the wealth distribution would improve But it wouldn't benefit all families... then again, being born into the 1% wouldn't mean you would inherit anything if no one was going to die... but money could still be given in substantial sums by those who had it to give. This might help some reproduce more frequently or earlier into life, esp. if charities were involved and such gifts were not taxed or given in substantial enough quantities that one could still afford to pay the fee after setting aside the taxes.

[shadowhawk]

 

 

 

The opposite of Death by Government.  Our only hope is the government forcing everyone into it.

 

Shouldn't they though? With the diseases of aging sucking up 95% of the healthcare money spent, wouldn't it be cheaper to cryopreserve everyone until sustainable solutions and age reversal technology could be applied? The savings would pay for itself and leave us much better off.

 

What, death, life, disease, freeze us, all determined by the government?  What do you think would happen if they voted on it today?  Lets have a dictatorship along with our life.  As long as you think right, life for you.  What an interesting future.

 

 

Ok, so we'd make it optional for those who can afford to live and suffer or who can provide a sufficient contribution. But remember that by sucking up that 95% of healthcare, you're taking the resources from someone else or from disease research for a non aging dependent disease, most of which will be children's diseases. Do you want to do that?

 

 

So what do you want to do with all those people who have health problems you don't approve of?  Take their money , which I doubt they will like, by force so you can spend it on your projects.  If it is worthwhile you are going to have to convene people to do it.   But it seems the suckers are in trouble if you ever get in control.  I like it better when you argue the merits of your position.  If I want to spend my money to cure children s diseases I want that to be my choice, not yours. 
 

[YOLF]

 

 

 

 

The opposite of Death by Government.  Our only hope is the government forcing everyone into it.

 

Shouldn't they though? With the diseases of aging sucking up 95% of the healthcare money spent, wouldn't it be cheaper to cryopreserve everyone until sustainable solutions and age reversal technology could be applied? The savings would pay for itself and leave us much better off.

 

What, death, life, disease, freeze us, all determined by the government?  What do you think would happen if they voted on it today?  Lets have a dictatorship along with our life.  As long as you think right, life for you.  What an interesting future.

 

 

Ok, so we'd make it optional for those who can afford to live and suffer or who can provide a sufficient contribution. But remember that by sucking up that 95% of healthcare, you're taking the resources from someone else or from disease research for a non aging dependent disease, most of which will be children's diseases. Do you want to do that?

 

 

So what do you want to do with all those people who have health problems you don't approve of?  Take their money , which I doubt they will like, by force so you can spend it on your projects.  If it is worthwhile you are going to have to convene people to do it.   But it seems the suckers are in trouble if you ever get in control.  I like it better when you argue the merits of your position.  If I want to spend my money to cure children s diseases I want that to be my choice, not yours. 
 

 

 

No, I'm not approaching it from that direction and I'm assuming that we move to a socialist health care system. So it's tax money that's being spent rather than your money. There are no suckers who are being taken advantage of. Rather, I'm approaching it from the R&D, and insurance perspectives and only spending money to develop cures and curing most aging disease by removal of the aging. See it for what human progress becomes, rather than what you get or what is being taken from you... though you do get to be perfectly young and healthy and never have to live through a disease that you don't want to. When a condition is such that it can't be cured, you'd either live with it, or get reversible cryonics and wait for a cure (I'm not a fan of what insurance companies pay for drugs that degrade or make deals with the devil so to speak with QoL, these things are worthless and people only pay for them b/c having insurance as an intermediary takes the decision to spend money for what they're getting out of their hands (inconsequential copays don't count). If patients understood that it takes less effort to cure most diseases including their own by curing aging and it's pathologies (see example below), I think they'd opt for the healthcare/pharma industries to do that instead of developing an endless stream of drugs that guide them to their death. If your condition kills you (or rather, if it will do so imminently or say 6-12 months), you get cryonics, but cryonics would be voluntary at just about any time for just about any condition that a patient would decide wasn't worth living with or whenever QoL falls below a certain level. We'd also be working to develop and prove methods for the reversal of cryonics.

 

Example

Take inflammatory conditions as an example, the drugs most commonly used, glucocorticosteroids can be quite expensive. 100s or 1000s a month for some of them, even more for other anti-inflammatories, and patients eventually develop resistance or tolerance to them as well as the drug class as a whole seems to accelerate aging, lead to infection, physical injury, weight gain from becoming brittle or just the hormonal imbalance they cause and that kind of thing. So those using them, whether they realize it or not are making a deal with the devel. Their life gets a little easier RIGHT NOW, but then it's going to keep getting worse, and the drugs are going to keep getting more expensive as the condition worsens. Personally, I'd rather wait that shit out in cryonics than degrade my health and lose the opportunity for an active and physically vigorous lifestyle. Being taken care of of the industry isn't about how they're taking care of you, but where your care is taking or leading you. I think most people want to return to their lives. People shouldn't have to accept this kind of thing and we should be more concerned with realities that we're creating.