Top products from r/cryonics

We found 11 product mentions on r/cryonics. We ranked the 6 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the top 20.

Next page

Top comments that mention products on r/cryonics:

u/Synopticz · 2 pointsr/cryonics

Who promises that this will happen within 100 years? You need to give citations when you make statements like this.

Anyway: slicing, scanning, and uploading could all potentially be automated with machines and therefore be cheap. This could easily happen within a 100-300 year timeframe, if civilization doesn't collapse.

If you look back at the history of anti-aging, one of the most prominent theories in the early 1900s (1910s-1920s) was that hormone replacement could help extend lifespan. And one of the most prominent critiques of that idea was that only the rich would be able to access it.

Citation: A History of Life-Extensionism In The Twentieth Century, https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00SHPD0N4

If you look 100 years later... the technology is now easily accessible in richer countries such as the US. E.g., testosterone and estrogen replacement therapy is usually covered by Medicare:

- https://www.goodrx.com/testosterone/medicare-coverage

- https://www.goodrx.com/blog/prices-for-estrogen-replacement-therapies-double-four-years/

u/Mars2035 · 1 pointr/cryonics

If they made a simulation of me while I am still alive, then it would be like suddenly having an identical twin living in the computer. Our lives had been identical up to that point, but at the instant the scan was taken, our personal subjective timelines began to diverge. If you were the emulation, then to you, this would seem like being in the scanning apparatus, and then suddenly being somewhere else (as a simulation). The "somewhere else" could be in a high-fidelity virtual environment (like a holodeck. Who knows? maybe meat people could plug in and visit you there.), or in an android body running a brain emulation of your scan. There are examples of this in science fiction that would do a better job explaining what this would be like if it really happened. The two examples that come to mind are the Star Trek: TNG episode "Second Chances" (Wikipedia article for the episode - WARNING SPOILERS) and a recently-published near-future technothriller called Time Frame (Amazon Kindle Link). These are both fiction, obviously, but I find science fiction to be helpful in situations like this because it can provide a frame of reference for discussing things outside our normal daily experience but which might someday be possible. It's important to note that both of you would definitely still be alive for a while. If you were the emulation, and then the biological version died, you would feel sad in the same way that you would feel sad if you had an identical twin brother/sister and he/she died. So in the event that an emulation is created before legal death of the source material (the "bio-you") (or in any such circumstances where one or more versions can keep accruing separate subjective experience), then to discard either of them would be murder in a pragmatic sense. If you had an EM created while you were alive (let's say, in your 30s) and then you died when you were 80, you would still want your 80-year-old brain to be scanned and made into an EM as well. Otherwise, the EM from age 30 would mourn the loss of his/her brother/sister like the death of a sibling. Once the scan of the deceased 80-year-old complete and the EM is online, there would still only be two because there was no opportunity for subjective experience to diverge between the biological and emulated versions.


That said, there's also the scenario where future technology might allow frequent "backups" that are never actually instantiated unless the original dies. I was first introduced to this concept when it was explored in Peter F. Hamilton's excellent Commonwealth series. Well worth a read, especially Pandora's Star and Judas Unchained.

u/MaximilianKohler · 1 pointr/cryonics

> Also, the stuff in your link after the ? causes it to be detected as spam and automatically removed by reddit.
>
>
>
> Thanks for the heads up. How do I fix it?

In the future remove all the unnecessary stuff after the ? in the link. Eg: https://www.amazon.com/Blue-Ribbon-Balloon-Disposable-Helium/dp/B074SX4BCZ

>If you are intent on committing suicide it is obvious on the face of it that you are shooting yourself in the foot instead of in the head by telling (and traumatizing) others. Do you disagree?

In most cases you're probably right. In the case of cryonics it becomes very tricky, and thus advice from knowledgeable people is vital.

I recall trying to commit suicide as a young teen. I told my peers, and it wasn't a cry for help. It was just to see their reaction.

u/Michael-G-Darwin · 3 pointsr/cryonics
  1. Alcor was guided by the policy exemplified by the maxim primum non nocere or, first, do no harm. Prior to this incident, Alcor's policy in such situations was to counsel the members about the inevitability of autopsy and its implication for his cryopreservation and if applicable to explain that his insurance will not pay and that Alcor will, under no circumstances, cryopreserve him if there is inadequate funding. Indeed, to do otherwise would require a vote of the full Alcor Board. Having done this, it was the policy to end communication with the member, call any family designated or others such as DPAHC in his Alcor paperwork and notify law enforcement.
  2. Since Alcor at that time operated under the authority of a Medical Director who had ultimate responsibility for Alcor's actions with respect to how they handle such situations (e.g. living members) Alcor was bound under the California “Tarasoff statute”, which requires mandatory reporting of people who are threatening harm to self or others and is one of the few exceptions to the HIPPA act. Jerry Leaf, Steve Harris and I were all cognizant of this fact having had medical training and worked in a hospital environment. As Steve Harris notes in his Usenet exchange, Alcor lost this knowledge and expertise when they “froze out” every person with this knowledge and experience.
  3. Over a three-week period, non-professional Alcor staff with absolutely no medical, psychological, psychiatric or other training in the management of suicidal patients engaged in an ad hoc and wholly inappropriate dialogue with a deeply depressed and suicidal man who was not terminally ill. During this time, they made medically and legally uninformed decisions about this member's condition and state of mind. Very seriously, they did not note that in addition to being depressed, the member was floridly irrational and consistently lied to Alcor personnel and supplied misleading information about his medical condition, all of which was apparent to the Alcor staff counseling this man at the time it was happening. Such behavior is typically a sign of additional severe mental illness that, apart from major depression, may well have been treatable.

    It was not within the scope of Alcor's expertise or capability to diagnose this man's mental illness or to act according to their often-chaotic personal judgment. Indeed, given that this member was consistently lying to them about other illnesses and health matters Alcor should have had every reason to question this member’s self-assessment of the futility of further psychiatric care. In short, they did not know this man, did not know his full medical history and were not in any way qualified to interpret or to act upon it.

  1. Despite having at least two closely involved members who were state-licensed as a psychologist and psychiatrist respectively, and who had provided Alcor with advice in the past at no charge and indicated a willingness to continue to do so, Alcor never consulted with either of them. or with any other qualified professional, and instead spent 3-weeks stumbling around trying to decide what to do.

  2. They allowed cryopreservation treatment, and the values and worldview associated with it, to become a determining factor in the medical management of a living, non-terminal member.

  3. They allowed their personal libertarian philosophy and Thomas Szas-like approach to the management of severe mental illness to govern their decision-making, substituting this for core community standards and the law in the case of a non-terminal illness.

  4. They concluded that it may have all been for the best because, despite the member having put a bullet through his brain and having remained undiscovered for at least a day, noting that the member got cryopreserved and thus has an opportunity to reach a time when his disease can be cured!

  5. Instead of referring this member to individuals or institutions competent and certified to deal with him, they instead put him touch with an Alcor member who was herself diagnosed as severely mentally ill, and who had no medical or other training in dealing with suicidal individuals.

  6. When there was serious criticism of their actions, including from medically qualified Alcor members, they did not change their position or acknowledged that they made a mistake.

  7. They exposed Alcor, and more generally cryonics, to the risk of potential litigation, alienation of the professional medical community and increased public censure and ostracism.

    To be clear, suicide is not illegal in the U.S. and in a country swimming in firearms and in no short supply of tall buildings or rope, it is virtually impossible to prevent someone who is intent upon committing suicide from doing so. For those who want a no muss, no fuss and completely painless exit they can order a party helium tank on Amazon for ~$60: https://www.amazon.com/Blue-Ribbon-Balloon-Disposable-Helium/dp/B074SX4BCZ

    While not illegal, what suicide is is profoundly non-normative and against the core values of the society we live in. Even most libertarians are well informed of and abide by most norms, which are in effect social imperatives. It is not for instance, illegal to go out in public and to work in your underwear, to go about dressed up as an animal or cartoon character, to lick the anus of your dog or cat in public, to eat feces at lunch in front of your coworkers, or to cover you face in tattoos. Even people with IQs well to the left on the bell curve understand that, while not illegal, if they exhibit these kinds of behavior they will be subject to severe community disapproval, which may well result in ostracism, public, and private ridicule, loss of employment and loss of the ability to interact socially with most others.

    To my knowledge, cryonics organizations have had as members and patients one or more people from the following classes: habitual criminals, sex traffickers, pedophiles, murderers, underworld gangsters who have killed and terrorized many people, sociopaths, psychopaths, white supremacists, neo-Nazis, sexual paraphiliacs and drugs abusers (and this is the shortlist). [ And, to quote President Trump, and some “very fine people” as well.] Strangely enough, none of these people, or others like them are ever profiled on the cover or in the pages of any cryonics organizations magazines or newsletters. Instead, people accorded that honor are selected for their wholesome normality and often for their good looks. I raise this issue because it demonstrates that cryonics organizations diligently strive to project an image of “normality” that the community at large can relate to and they do this because they want to attract new members “from the public”. In other words, they have no compunction about creating a desirable public image for promotional purposes even if this is not representative of many of their members.

    To have behaved as they did in the “Mr. Daly” case, and then to publish the story in detail, implies (among other possibilities) that they are grossly irresponsible or social morons. With all of the other disgusting behaviors I’ve listed as violations of non-negotiable social norms, you will note that the public response to such behaviors, no matter how outraged, does not include notifying the authorities. By contrast, imminent suicide, while legal, most often does trigger action to prevent it. Indeed, such actions are mandatory for physicians, schools, hospitals and even prisons! It is at this point that we come to an important distinction. It isn’t really suicide that triggers social and legal intervention, but rather the communication of the intent to commit suicide to others. This is the case because such behavior is often a “cry for help”, and in any event, it unwillingly involves others in an issue with profound moral implications and the potential to cause serious distress, or even lasting psychological harm.

    People who have fully rationalized their decision to commit suicide do not involve strangers in their decision and if they do, they de facto void their right to take their own lives without triggering interventions to stop them. This is so axiomatic that even children understand it. The point here is that Alcor did not, and there is ample evidence that they continue in this fashion today. The Pilgeram lawsuit is a case in point. Who violates the terms of a member’s cryonics agreement to be cared for as a whole body by arbitrarily converting him to neuro after freezing him as a whole-body patient and then sends his cremated remains to his unsuspecting family? The answer is, “no one with a modicum of social intelligence or common human decency would do such a thing”.