What happened to the first cryogenically frozen humans? • Hacker News Board

Re: What happened to the first cryogenically frozen humans?

#51

Post by swayvil » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 2:04 AM UTC

abletonlive wrote: post #12

drchiu wrote: post #10

Years ago when I was in medical school, I concluded to improve quality of life, no matter how finite, is a better endeavour than to prolong it. There's something tremendously philosophically satisfying to recognizing that death is just the recycling of life so that new life can happen.

This is the mindset of most of the medical field so basically you bought into the status quo. Nothing profound about that. Those that are interested in longevity reject such notions because it leads to very little research in how to prolong life, or see death as a disease worth curing.

Someday they'll demonstrate existence of an afterlife to the satisfaction of the average consumer and the whole world is gonna do a Homer Simpson.

I mean, it'll flip our whole value system.

Re: What happened to the first cryogenically frozen humans?

#52

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 2:06 AM UTC

drchiu wrote: post #10

Years ago when I was in medical school, I concluded to improve quality of life, no matter how finite, is a better endeavour than to prolong it. There's something tremendously philosophically satisfying to recognizing that death is just the recycling of life so that new life can happen.

[deleted]

Re: What happened to the first cryogenically frozen humans?

#53

Post by SamBam » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 2:06 AM UTC

cultureulterior wrote: post #13

drchiu wrote: post #10

Years ago when I was in medical school, I concluded to improve quality of life, no matter how finite, is a better endeavour than to prolong it. There's something tremendously philosophically satisfying to recognizing that death is just the recycling of life so that new life can happen.

I don't agree, and you shouldn't force those of us who don't agree to die.

What a strange statement, who said anything about forcing anyone to do anything?

Do you think GP's decision not to focus their work on life extension is forcing you to die?

Re: What happened to the first cryogenically frozen humans?

#54

Post by willnonya » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 2:07 AM UTC

Spooky23 wrote: post #30

reaperducer wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His choice. Not yours.

It’s funny on HN tonight. We have one thread where a county in rural Tennessee lets houses burn down for want of a $75 free or 0.13% tax increase, because freedom. And here, because freedom, people are advocating for the freedom to pretend death isn’t approaching, at the cost of millions to society.

How do you equate some people's denial of death with a cost of millions to society rather than as costs to the indovidual?

Re: What happened to the first cryogenically frozen humans?

#55

Post by jjcon » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 2:08 AM UTC

swayvil wrote: post #51

abletonlive wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the mindset of most of the medical field so basically you bought into the status quo. Nothing profound about that. Those that are interested in longevity reject such notions because it leads to very little research in how to prolong life, or see death as a disease worth curing.

Someday they'll demonstrate existence of an afterlife to the satisfaction of the average consumer and the whole world is gonna do a Homer Simpson. I mean, it'll flip our whole value system.

Genuinely curious for your perspective- can you elaborate?

Re: What happened to the first cryogenically frozen humans?

#56

Post by thefounder » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 2:10 AM UTC

swayvil wrote: post #51

abletonlive wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the mindset of most of the medical field so basically you bought into the status quo. Nothing profound about that. Those that are interested in longevity reject such notions because it leads to very little research in how to prolong life, or see death as a disease worth curing.

Someday they'll demonstrate existence of an afterlife to the satisfaction of the average consumer and the whole world is gonna do a Homer Simpson. I mean, it'll flip our whole value system.

So the religious fanatics were right all along? I think the afterlife is actually the life after you realise there is no afterlife. Many never reach it.

Re: What happened to the first cryogenically frozen humans?

#57

Post by afpx » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 2:11 AM UTC

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #35

drchiu wrote: post #10

Years ago when I was in medical school, I concluded to improve quality of life, no matter how finite, is a better endeavour than to prolong it. There's something tremendously philosophically satisfying to recognizing that death is just the recycling of life so that new life can happen.

> I concluded to improve quality of life, no matter how finite, is a better endeavour than to prolong it. Seems like a false dichotomy. Aside from life support in one's final days, most practical medical interventions for prolonging life also result in significant improvements in quality of life. For example, healthy diet and exercise contribute to extended lifespan, but they also improve quality of life significantl…

Are you over 50? A year over 50 feels as satisfying as one month being 18. I’d rather enjoy what I have left.

Re: What happened to the first cryogenically frozen humans?

#58

Post by thefounder » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 2:14 AM UTC

mrshadowgoose wrote: post #41

cultureulterior wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't agree, and you shouldn't force those of us who don't agree to die.

In a hopeless situation, I would not prolong my life. But that would be my choice for myself. I don't get to make that choice for others. Why should you?

The trick is that's hard to know the hopeless situation. Many people get away with cancer so are you ready to deny yourself one more chance to live?

Re: What happened to the first cryogenically frozen humans?

#59

Post by swayvil » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 2:16 AM UTC

jjcon wrote: post #55

swayvil wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someday they'll demonstrate existence of an afterlife to the satisfaction of the average consumer and the whole world is gonna do a Homer Simpson. I mean, it'll flip our whole value system.

Genuinely curious for your perspective- can you elaborate?

I'm into meditation and similar mystic weirdness.

I've seen what appears to be a literal "city of the dead".

No doubt a metaphor. But metaphor appears to be a big part of "reality".

I've also seen what appears to be a "creator of reality".

So ya, it's a weird world.

Re: What happened to the first cryogenically frozen humans?

#60

Post by oceanplexian » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 2:18 AM UTC

RajT88 wrote: post #17

drchiu wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose what I didn’t reveal is that I spent a lot of time before medicine trying to coax cells whether in a culture or some other medium to grow in the way I wanted it to grow. And it was hard. It’s been a while, but if I could recall correctly, cells tended to have a finiteness in their very nature. I think at some subconscious level, I interpreted this as nature’s way of expressing that is how things are designe…

> It’s been a while, but if I could recall correctly, cells tended to have a finiteness in their very nature. This is known: https://en.wikipedia.org//wiki/Hayflick_limit

On the other hand, there are 150-year-old tortoises and 200-year-old whales out there. So it's not like there is some finite impossibility to living a long time, other animals have figured it out.