Would you cryogenically freeze yourself?

[TimeSkip]

There are companies that specialize in cryogenically freezing a person as to treat ailments in the future that aren't yet treatable today.

I know there are some preppers here; but, no neologism for cryogenic freezing really exists, maybe cryogenics?

Would you ever cryogenically freeze yourself to avoid death if life extension is more available in the future?

Here's one company, but, I'd like to see more of them if possible...

 

[BWV]

I would only consider a company that offered a money-back guarantee

 

[Vanadium 50]

And irony is Walt Disney actually was frozen!
(yes, I know this is an urban legend)

 

[BWV]

Assuming technology exists, why would anyone in the future would want to revive a 21st century cryo customer? They comprise an obvious sample of the most obnoxious and entitled people alive.

On the other hand, maybe they would be thawed and prosecuted for climate change and put in labor camps.

 

[Halc]

There are companies that specialize in cryogenically freezing a person as to treat ailments in the future that aren't yet treatable today.

They might be able to treat my cancer someday, but not treat the death that resulted from it. The cryonics folks cannot freeze you until you're already dead, so it isn't a way to avoid death, at least not legal death. A dead person has no rights and no money, and thus the only reason why some future wiz-doctor is going to thaw you is to have a semi-living subject on which to experiment, and perhaps create a legally non-person slave.

You're also banking on company X existing and the power never failing on your freezer between you giving your money to company X and somebody actually finding a motivation to reanimate your body at his own expense, or possibly at the expense of your future descendents.

How much would I pay to revive a century-dead ancestor into a state of not-entirely-dead-anymore? Not much... Never heard of the guy anyway, but I suppose he'd make a cool attraction at the carnival, especially if he's one of the ones that just preserve the head and not the rest.

 

[DaveE]

They might be able to treat my cancer someday, but not treat the death that resulted from it. The cryonics folks cannot freeze you until you're already dead, so it isn't a way to avoid death, at least not legal death. A dead person has no rights and no money, and thus the only reason why some future wiz-doctor is going to thaw you is to have a semi-living subject on which to experiment, and perhaps create a legally non-person slave.

You're also banking on company X existing and the power never failing on your freezer between you giving your money to company X and somebody actually finding a motivation to reanimate your body at his own expense, or possibly at the expense of your future descendents.

How much would I pay to revive a century-dead ancestor into a state of not-entirely-dead-anymore? Not much... Never heard of the guy anyway, but I suppose he'd make a cool attraction at the carnival, especially if he's one of the ones that just preserve the head and not the rest.

Yes, this! So, so, so many reasons being frozen doesn't make sense. On a scale from emotional to rational decision making. This one is all the way at the emotional end.

 

[Astronuc]

Don't do it in Texas.

 

[rsk]

I think of how strawberries come out of the freezer and think no, that's not for me.

 

[256bits]

I think of how strawberries come out of the freezer and think no, that's not for me.

Why are you afraid of someone - something - thawing you out, pouring cream and sprinkling sugar on you, as a treat?

 

[nuuskur]

I would not. Don't know anything about potential side effects post-thaw, should I be alive at that point.

 

[256bits]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ötzi
This guy tried it, or rather he was volunteered to try the freezing.
It didn't work out to well for him.
After 5000 years of medical technological advances, he was not revivable.

 

[Astronuc]

Make sure your body (or rather the cryogenic storage container) is bubble wrapped. You don't want to be dropped on a hard surface.

 

[skyshrimp]

If they could revive someone without injury then I would probably do it, but not until I was fairly old.

I'd want to wake up in the distant future and marvel at all the advancements, but knowing my luck, the morning cleaner at the lab wil unplug my cryogenic chamber to plug in her hoover and forgot to plug me back in..

 

[Wrichik Basu]

 

[Vanadium 50]

Welcome to the 41st century. The good news is we have a cure for cancer. The bad news is we don't have a cure for freezer burn.

 

[nuuskur]

but ..but.. what about the Riemann hypothesis?

 

[DennisN]

Would you ever cryogenically freeze yourself to avoid death if life extension is more available in the future?

Maybe. It sounds like it could be a cool experience.

 

[OCR]

.

Maybe.

It sounds like it could be a cool experience.

Well, sure. . . what could possibly go wrong ?
Lol. . . .
.

 

[DennisN]

Well, sure. . . what could possibly go wrong ?

As long as the operating system used for the cryogenic freezer is not Windows Vista it at least has a chance of going well.

 

[OCR]

As long as the operating system used for the cryogenic freezer is. . .

It would be completely failsafe. . . .

.

 

[JT Smith]

I'd want to see some demonstration first, a proof of concept. The whole notion of reanimation is so speculative. Have we brought any organism back from the dead? Our understanding of consciousness is extremely meager at best. Who is to say that a reanimated you will be "you"? I'm not positing supernatural explanations, just pointing out that we don't really know very much.

So to put money into this seems like the worst Kickstarter ever.

I guess if you have cash to burn and no self-respect, why not? Buy a ticket to Mars too.

 

[rsk]

Ooh yes, would your soul have already departed leaving your newly thawed body susceptible to possession by something malign?

What happened in that film with Tom Cruise? (The original, without Mr Cruise, was MILES better btw, in case anyone cares.)

 

[skyshrimp]

It's funny how we joke about this, but it will be an option soon.

Your blood would be drained out and replaced with a preservative.

If I woke up in the future, I would probably be wishing I froze myself earlier.

 

[TimeSkip]

Jokes aside. ALCOR, the company listed in the OP, talks about 'vitrification', which avoids the issues with cryo-freeze or damage due to expanding water to ice molecules.

Not sure how to avoid the whole issue with making it to their headquarters whilst still preserved, as this is an operation they have to do to exchange blood for preservatives or some such.

 

[BillTre]

There are several issues when it comes to cryo-preserving people.

1) Freezing and thawing of animals has not to my knowledge been done with anything larger than a very small worms, mammalian embryos, and an occasional fish in labs.

2) Vitrification is usually only be done on very small things. Vitrificating larger things like people, seems largely unrealistic to me. It usually involves freezing a sample in particular ways which could net be achieved throughout the body of something large like a human. The interior would probably freeze too slowly.

3) Thawing out would have its challenges. Inside probably too slow to warm up.

4) Resuscitating the dead has not been done.

Over, I wouldn't do it. It seems unlikely to work and would be a waste of money.

 

[JT Smith]

4) Resuscitating the dead has not been done.

Those are all good points but #4 seems like the main thing. If they could raise the dead you'd think that a little freezer burn wouldn't be that big of a deal.

It's interesting to think about though. What makes you "you"? It can't be the specific bits of matter. An atom is an atom and the molecules that make up a human body almost entirely turn over on a regular basis. It must be in the precise organization of that matter. But if that's the case then a perfect copy of you would also be "you". Does that make sense though? What if we made two copies?

None of this is even remotely possible technologically at present. What I wonder is if it may turn out to be impossible in principle.

For now though it's just kind of silly to get your head frozen in Arizona.

 

[BillTre]

It's interesting to think about though. What makes you "you"? It can't be the specific bits of matter. An atom is an atom and the molecules that make up a human body almost entirely turn over on a regular basis. It must be in the precise organization of that matter. But if that's the case then a perfect copy of you would also be "you". Does that make sense though? What if we made two copies?

The same argument could be made about whether you are the same you when you wake as you were yesterday.
I am guessing that the recalling memories of your past events give you the apparent knowledge about your continuity with who you were yesterday. If those memories were lost, you would not have a past you to assume continuity with and it would not be an issue.

Similarly, if you were unfrozen and revived, but lost your memories of your past self, you would not have your past self to compare with and make these kinds of mental connections with.

 

[JT Smith]

So if I could somehow erase all of your memories you'd cease to be aware of yourself as a distinct individual?
Conversely, if I made an exact copy of you with identical memories you'd be both people at the same time?

I am guessing...

Me too. :-)

 

[BillTre]

I made an exact copy of you with identical memories you'd be both people at the same time?

They would both think they were.
However, they view of who they were (based upon their histories post-copying) would then diverge based on their separate histories.

 

[ChemAir]

I'd really like to see the resiliency of the backup power at one of these places.

 

[JT Smith]

They would both think they were.
However, they view of who they were (based upon their histories post-copying) would then diverge based on their separate histories.

But which one would you be?

If everything that makes you "you" is encoded in how your brain is organized then you shouldn't mind if I copy you and then destroy the original organism. But I have a hunch that you would object.

 

[BillTre]

But which one would you be?

Both would be different versions of me (or you) that took different paths from their divergence point (when they were copied).

then you shouldn't mind if I copy you and then destroy the original organism.

Once the mechanism is well worked out and well demonstrated (like Star Trek transporters, which seem to be doing exactly what you describe), I would be as likely to consider it, as I would a transporter ride.
However, with existing technology, not today.

 

[JT Smith]

It's interesting that you seem to be indifferent to the fate of an individual person so long as there is, somewhere in the universe, at some time, a copy. I think each of those copies would see themselves as individuals and would fear for their lives if threatened with destruction.

Even with the Star Trek transporter there was an implicit notion of self. I've seen all of those episodes and I don't recall exact copies every being produced. There was one show where Kirk was split into two versions of himself, but they were two halves of his personality, not copies.

Fun to think about.

 

[BillTre]

As one copy (on the ship) is destroyed, another is made (on a planet).
Seems the same to me.

Yeah, fun stuff.