Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Doctors' estimates of the feasibility of preserving the dying for future revival

medrxiv.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 110 posts

Re: Doctors' estimates of the feasibility of preserving the dying for future revival

#41

Post by jaccola »

michaelt wrote: post #4

When it comes to cryopreservation the thing I find infeasible is the idea a provider would bother with the preservation, under the incentives of capitalism. If someone pays millions of dollars to a company that promises to freeze their corpse for 200 years, the company can simply freeze the corpse for a decade or two, take the millions of dollars as dividends and executive bonuses, then declare bankruptcy. The dead c…

With enough money, at least here in the UK, it is possible to set up structures that endure for one sole purpose for many generations.

It was quite common for rich Victorians to donate their grounds/houses to be used for the public good and still today they are owned by the original trust and money from the trust can only be used in a certain way etc... we have many parks because of this (that otherwise could have been developed to extract money).

Obviously the longer the technology takes to develop, the higher the chance something goes wrong; though the concepts of trusts have existed for some 800 years so if it takes only 200 years, I think your chances are good!

Re: Doctors' estimates of the feasibility of preserving the dying for future revival

#42

Post by accrual »

polishdude20 wrote: post #3

I thought about death the other day and how maybe it's akin to the feeling of going under before a surgery. When you go under and then wake up some hours later, often you feel like no time has passed at all. What if death is just that same feeling or lack thereof for Millenia, an infinite amount of time, but at some point from your perspective, you wake up instantly far in the future. Like a photon travelling for mil…

Time is fun to think about. It seems to only matter if one has the facilities to perceive and quantify time passing.

Some suggest time is an illusion. A nice linear construct to help conscious beings integrate in the material world. Eckhart Tolle advises there is no past and future, only now. And in some spiritual models time doesn't exist outside the material world, and takes on a hub and spoke model, where all of time is instantly accessible (think RAM vs tape).

Not saying any of this is true or positing materalism vs not, but it's interesting to ponder.

Re: Doctors' estimates of the feasibility of preserving the dying for future revival

#43

Post by overtone1000 »

DennisP wrote: post #21
baxtr wrote: post #5

> Conclusions and Relevance: US physicians assigned a median 25.5% probability to preservation retaining neural information under ideal conditions in a manner potentially compatible with future patient revival. The majority support for pre-mortem anticoagulation and substantial support for pre-cardiac arrest initiation indicate that many physicians would consider accommodating patient requests for preservation-enhanc…

That's a way higher number than I expected.

I agree, and I am a US physician! Curiously, their paper was sponsored by an entity that funds cryopreservation research. The paper asserts that those surveyed were general practitioners, but the actual survey itself had quotas for various subspecialties. The survey also has an introduction section that frames cryopreservation (not used in medicine) in the context of hypothermic protocols (commonly used in medicine), which would seem to lend it some legitimacy. But that isn't a fair comparison. Only critical care specialists and some surgeons and anesthesiologists have much experience with therapeutic hypothermia. GPs would typically have less experience and might not readily notice the inequivalence.

I can't help but wonder whether they changed the protocol after the survey was designed and only interviewed general practitioners. Or, worse, perhaps they selectively excluded a portion of the interviewed population.

Re: Doctors' estimates of the feasibility of preserving the dying for future revival

#44

Post by neetle »

throwawaylaptop wrote: post #20
peacebeard wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not your fault.

Its obviously not my 'fault'. But it's pretty close to a death I could have prevented for a while if I wasnt pretending to be busy probably. I remember when she said her dad was going to go instead and I thought "uhh, I don't think that's going to work.. I should just go" but I didn't really like her that much at that point and figured it would just be a lame wasted hike, not that the dude would die.

You do have a little fault here, but it’s marginal vs his lifetime choices, and his lack of understanding of his limits. There should be enough room for forgiveness in all of that.

I get it, I got friends and family that have completed suicide and it’s hard to not think about what I could have done differently.

Re: Doctors' estimates of the feasibility of preserving the dying for future revival

#45

Post by accrual »

codyb wrote: post #24
throwawaylaptop wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its obviously not my 'fault'. But it's pretty close to a death I could have prevented for a while if I wasnt pretending to be busy probably. I remember when she said her dad was going to go instead and I thought "uhh, I don't think that's going to work.. I should just go" but I didn't really like her that much at that point and figured it would just be a lame wasted hike, not that the dude would die.

Ya know, ya really waited until the second comment here to add in the "pretending" lol

I feel it's kind of a moot point. GP's intention or train of thought doesn't change the downstream effects. Busy or not, they didn't go, and that's the bool the universe went with.

As others have already stated though it's really not GP's fault and they're not responsible for managing other's decisions. Could they have saved a person? Maybe. Or maybe the late father would have died a week later anyways.

Re: Doctors' estimates of the feasibility of preserving the dying for future revival

#46

Post by episteme »

polishdude20 wrote: post #3

I thought about death the other day and how maybe it's akin to the feeling of going under before a surgery. When you go under and then wake up some hours later, often you feel like no time has passed at all. What if death is just that same feeling or lack thereof for Millenia, an infinite amount of time, but at some point from your perspective, you wake up instantly far in the future. Like a photon travelling for mil…

With no memories going with me, it feels just as scary.

Re: Doctors' estimates of the feasibility of preserving the dying for future revival

#47

Post by throwawaylaptop »

nehal3m wrote: post #36
throwawaylaptop wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its obviously not my 'fault'. But it's pretty close to a death I could have prevented for a while if I wasnt pretending to be busy probably. I remember when she said her dad was going to go instead and I thought "uhh, I don't think that's going to work.. I should just go" but I didn't really like her that much at that point and figured it would just be a lame wasted hike, not that the dude would die.

Life is full of moments like that. For example on your way to work that same morning, had you left your house 30 seconds later than you did, someone might have had to wait at an intersection longer than they otherwise would have, causing them to narrowly miss being in an accident further down the road instead of being hit. Butterfly effect and all that. You can’t predict the future.

I don't worry too much about the butterfly effect because it goes both ways. Sure one stoplight here makes a guy die, but another stoplight over there saves a guys life.

But in this case, when it's a clear "either I put off changing my oil and washing my car, or this 250 lb senior citizen with gout tries going on a hike", it's a lot more clear.

Re: Doctors' estimates of the feasibility of preserving the dying for future revival

#48

Post by marcher »

polishdude20 wrote: post #3

I thought about death the other day and how maybe it's akin to the feeling of going under before a surgery. When you go under and then wake up some hours later, often you feel like no time has passed at all. What if death is just that same feeling or lack thereof for Millenia, an infinite amount of time, but at some point from your perspective, you wake up instantly far in the future. Like a photon travelling for mil…

As someone who once came extremely close to death and was unconscious for days after eventually receiving medical care, my take on death is that it's probably similar to what you're saying about going under for surgery. I'm somewhat neutral to mixed on having been revived, but I no longer fear death. I still have a fear of suffering and having painful final moments, but death itself seems peaceful if nothing else.

In terms of something happening after death, my only real thought on that is that it really troubles me that I came into existence in the first place and that I experience anything at all. I sometimes wonder if that was truly a one time thing or if it's something that could happen again.

Re: Doctors' estimates of the feasibility of preserving the dying for future revival

#49

Post by umpalumpaaa »

DennisP wrote: post #40
michaelt wrote: post #4

When it comes to cryopreservation the thing I find infeasible is the idea a provider would bother with the preservation, under the incentives of capitalism. If someone pays millions of dollars to a company that promises to freeze their corpse for 200 years, the company can simply freeze the corpse for a decade or two, take the millions of dollars as dividends and executive bonuses, then declare bankruptcy. The dead c…

One way to mitigate that would be to put the money in a trust which pays the preservation company a monthly dividend. If the trust stops paying, the company can sue it. If the company goes out of business despite its ongoing revenue, the trust can try to find someone else to take over the storage. We already have trusts that manage wealth for multiple generations.

This is exactly how Companies are doing it… they put the money in a trust and pay for the ongoing costs by using interests from that trust.

Re: Doctors' estimates of the feasibility of preserving the dying for future revival

#50

Post by throwawaylaptop »

neetle wrote: post #44
throwawaylaptop wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its obviously not my 'fault'. But it's pretty close to a death I could have prevented for a while if I wasnt pretending to be busy probably. I remember when she said her dad was going to go instead and I thought "uhh, I don't think that's going to work.. I should just go" but I didn't really like her that much at that point and figured it would just be a lame wasted hike, not that the dude would die.

You do have a little fault here, but it’s marginal vs his lifetime choices, and his lack of understanding of his limits. There should be enough room for forgiveness in all of that. I get it, I got friends and family that have completed suicide and it’s hard to not think about what I could have done differently.

That's how I see it. Ive always felt a lot worse for the daughter too.
Post reply on HN