"We are on the verge of a revolution in medicine: understanding, treating, and ultimately preventing the causes of degenerative aging. But medical revolutions only happen if we all stand up in support of funding and research. We did it for cancer. We're doing it for Alzheimer's. We can do it for aging - and create an era of longer, healthier lives!"

Email Contact
reason -at- fightaging -dot- org

  
Search

The Causes of Aging
Accumulating AGEs
Buildup of Amyloid Between Cells
The Failing Immune System
Declining Lysosomal Function
Mitochondrial DNA Damage
Senescent Cells
Other Causes of Aging

Required Reading
Calorie Restriction
The Community, Visualized
Cryonics
Engineered Negligible Senescence
Envisaging a World Without the FDA
Healthy Life Extension Explained
Introductory Articles
Longevity Meme Newsletter
The Odds of Human Longevity Mutations
The Need For Activism and Advocacy
Stem Cells, Regenerative Medicine
Twelve Ways to Extend Mouse Life Span
The Vital Debate in Aging Research
What is Anti-Aging?

Initiatives
Biogerontology Research Foundation
Campaign Against Aging
Campaign for Aging Research
LifeStar Institute
Immortality Institute
Maximum Life Foundation
Methuselah Foundation
Mprize for Longevity Research
Science Against Aging (Translate)
SENS Foundation

Benefiting From Medical Research
How to Read Scientific Research
Researching Therapies and Clinical Trials

Objections Answered
Boredom
Inequality and Economics
Overpopulation
Stagnation
Being Older for Longer?
What About Retirement?

Recent Entries

  • The Conservative View of Progress in Applied Cancer Research
  • More on Stem Cell Technology and the Rise of Medical Tourism
  • Resting Metabolic Rate and Aging, Another of Metabolism's Complexities
  • Capabilities in Stem Cell Science Are Advancing Rapidly
  • Incentives and Cryonics
  • Videos From the Foresight 2010 Conference
  • A Steady Flow of New Donors at the Methuselah Foundation
  • Manipulating Fat in the Context of Slowing Aging
  • On Medical Tourism For Stem Cell Therapies
  • Cells, Hearts, and Brains
  • Rapamycin Research Rolls Onward
  • Reversing Blindness in Retinitis Pigmentosa With Stem Cells
  • The Body Does Work to Break Down Damaging Aggregates
  • A Few Cancer Stem Cell Articles
  • The Latest on Mitochondrial Uncoupling
  • Longevity Research at the Science Network
  • Journalists Are In the Business of Gathering Eyeballs, Not Truth
  • @ging, a New Aging Science Blog
  • Redefining Bionics Again
  • Encouraging Transparency in Life Science Fundraising

    Blogs of Interest
    @ging
    Accelerating Future
    Ageing Research
    Alcor News
    Al Fin Longevity
    April's CR Diary
    Andart
    Biology of Aging
    Biosingularity
    CRON Diary
    Cryonics Society
    Depressed Metabolism
    Distributed Republic
    Ethical Technology Blog
    Existence is Wonderful
    Foresight Institute
    Future Current
    FuturePundit
    grailsearch.org
    green light go
    HumanPlus
    In Search of Enlightenment
    Marginal Revolution
    Maximum Life Foundation Blog
    Metamagician and the Hellfire Club
    Metamodern
    Methuselah Foundation Blog
    Mises Economics Blog
    Ouroboros
    Overcoming Bias
    Pimm - Partial immortalization
    Responsible Nanotechnology
    ScienceBlogs
    Sentient Developments
    Singularity Hub
    Singularity Institute Blog
    Sonia Arrison
    The Speculist
    The Technological Citizen

    Archives (Monthly)

    March 2010
    February 2010
    January 2010
    December 2009
    November 2009
    October 2009
    September 2009
    August 2009
    July 2009
    June 2009
    May 2009
    April 2009
    March 2009
    February 2009
    January 2009
    December 2008
    November 2008
    October 2008
    September 2008
    August 2008
    July 2008
    June 2008
    May 2008
    April 2008
    March 2008
    February 2008
    January 2008
    December 2007
    November 2007
    October 2007
    September 2007
    August 2007
    July 2007
    June 2007
    May 2007
    April 2007
    March 2007
    February 2007
    January 2007
    December 2006
    November 2006
    October 2006
    September 2006
    August 2006
    July 2006
    June 2006
    May 2006
    April 2006
    March 2006
    February 2006
    January 2006
    December 2005
    November 2005
    October 2005
    September 2005
    August 2005
    July 2005
    June 2005
    May 2005
    April 2005
    March 2005
    February 2005
    January 2005
    December 2004
    November 2004
    October 2004
    September 2004
    August 2004
    July 2004
    June 2004
    May 2004
    April 2004
    March 2004
    February 2004
    January 2004

    Creative Commons

    Creative Commons License

    Fight Aging! is published under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license. In short, this means that you are encouraged to republish and rewrite Fight Aging! content in any way you see fit, the only requirements being that you (a) link to the original, (b) attribute the author, and (c) attribute Fight Aging!.

  • Monday, March 30, 2009

    Thinking About Cryonics

    I think it goes without saying that all minority interests suffer from credibility gaps. We humans are hardwired to be skeptical when we look in on something said to be good but not indulged by many people. It's a defense mechanism, most likely, but it does mean that when you do have a genuinely good, new idea, you'll know by the way you have to work hard to get anyone to listen.

    Cryonics, the low temperature preservation of the fine cellular structure of the body and brain at the end of life, is a good idea. There's a non-zero chance you'll be repaired and revived in a future of wondrous technologies, with the chance to live on for a very long time in a fascinating era. That compares favorably with the other options open to the dying, but cryonics remains a fringe practice. It hasn't yet bootstrapped to the level of participation that prevents knee-jerk rejection from most people.

    In this vein, a couple of recent posts from the community I'd like to draw to your attention:

    A Few Cool Quandaries

    I've recently found out just how "weird" and even "crackpottish" the idea of cryonics seems to Most People. I actually always saw it as one of the less weird things a person might conceivably find intriguing. But apparently that isn't the case.

    The Daily Mail Tackles Cryonics

    The Daily Mail, a UK tabloid legendary on the Internet for its dense celebrity reporting, has finally taken on the coolest topic of all - cryonics. Like many articles about freezing yourself solid to be revived in the future, this one is negative.

    Or is it? The Mail is a media outlet renowned for its disdain for facts in an industry renowned for its disdain for facts, but here, possibly accidentally, it turned out an article that might actually give a net positive impression.

    Posted by Reason

     
    Share |

    Posted by: AnneC at March 30, 2009 10:04 PM

    Overall I still definitely think cryonics is an intriguing and potentially viable research avenue. However, I think what really needs to happen (in order to establish legitimacy in a concrete fashion) is successful de-vitrification of a mammal. I think if that happened, there would be a LOT more interest in cryonics. Some may disagree, but I really think it's primarily a lack of concrete data keeping cryonics on the fringes. I mean, hardly anyone thinks twice about using a defibrillator now despite the Frankensteinian images the very notion of such a thing probably sparked originally.

    [Posted by: AnneC at March 30, 2009 10:04 PM]

    Posted by: shegeek at March 31, 2009 4:55 PM

    This is proof positive that the idea of cryonics has taken hold in the mainstream consciousness.

    During the past several years, I've watched my health return via a relatively new (and, in the beginning, obscure) medical protocol, and as a member of the study cohort, I've watched the protocol and its science grow toward mainstream acceptance. It's getting its big break right now--the discovering scientist and his team have no less than five articles going to press in major journals. One can probably guess that members of my patient community have gotten some knee-jerk reactions and taken some personal flak, but the mainstreaming, instead of helping, seems to be making it worse.

    We've seen the usual fluff, some trumpeting of the failed common "wisdom" by the popular media (which makes us look more crack-potty for going against it), and some blog discussions that show how badly information gets distorted when it's passed around second hand. But in particular, there was an inflammatory article written by a certain alternative health guru and published in his newsletter. It poked fun at our appearance (avoiding light exposure is part of the protocol), made ad hominem attacks against the discovering scientist, and of course, gave a distorted account of the protocol science and questioned our judgment for following it. The article received a lot of attention, and reinforced a lot of misconceptions that we will now have to answer for.

    We know that we can expect to see a lot more of this sort of thing as time goes on. As much as we hate it, though, we remind each other that it's a good sign and that it's free publicity.

    [Posted by: shegeek at March 31, 2009 4:55 PM]

    Post a comment; thoughtful, considered opinions are valued. Please note that comments incorporating ad hominem attacks, advertising, and other forms of inappropriate behavior are likely to be deleted.










    Remember personal info?