A new much more successful cryopreservation medical technology may create big problem

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2024...be-eternal

This new article describes how one materialist neuroscientist now believes he has found a very possible way of preserving human life indefinitely using very advanced medical techniques. Being a materialist he of course closed-mindedly believes that the mind and consciousness is what the physical brain does, and the only way to indefinitely prolong life is to somehow scientifically defeat the natural degradative disease and natural aging processes that up until now have defined the normal lifespan. Also, his materialist existential despair due to believing he is basically meat destined in the present to inevitably be annihilated must have spurred him on.

He thinks that the advocates of cryopreservation have led the way in this early on, but have picked a so far impractical method -  their idea is of long term preservation of human bodies frozen at liquid nitrogen temperatures, patients who just died of various incurable diseases, in the hope that future medical advances will enable successful cure and rescusitation, to greatly or indefinitely extend human lifetimes. The problem with this is that so far irreparable cellular damage is still being done by the cryogenic freezing process, making future revival impossible.

This neuroscientist thinks he has found a way around this basic problem, by using fixation of the brain and body cellular structure in a special stabilizing chemical that prevents ice crystal formation and resultant irreparable damage. He believes that this improved cryopreservation technique along with straightforward extrapolation of other developmental medical technologies could conceivably eventually lead to indefinite preservation of life. He apparently thinks that ultimately the new technology would have to be applied only to the brain, since in his belief the physical brain encompasses the total of our identity.

Most importantly, this researcher reports that this new basic brain-preserving technology actually is now not just possible but is in the advanced development stage, expected for near-future release and use on patients. Apparently there have been successful animal tests.

Of course mostly everybody would like to live for a very long time though not presumably forever, but I think that this developing technique is possibly dangerous and destructive from at least three major problems. The most important of these problems would relate to a proper understanding of the essentially spiritual nature of human beings. If looked at from this standpoint, this proposed "live forever" medical technology could seriously interfere with the underlying basic purpose of the Earth existence of human beings. There is (contrary to conventional materialist neuroscience) a lot of strong empirical evidence and philosphical arguments for the existence of an afterlife and of reincarnation, and of course the existence of a soul or spirit. This is still scoffed at by the physicalists, but they stand on unfirm ground.

We couldn't predict what problems will incur if the basic designed-by-the-powers-that-be purposes of human life and death on the Earth are so drastically interfered with. Presumable there could be very negative consequences.

The second major problem of this apparently possible new indefinitely life-preserving medical technology would be in the social turmoil due to the probable resultant overpopulation and consequent exhaustion of natural resources that would ensue without drastic birth control measures.  There would have to be massive social changes.

The third major problem would be the great likelihood that such technology would be very unevenly available, mainly to the rich and powerful, which would lead to major stresses in our social fabric, anger of the have-nots. This great increase in the inequality problems of our society could lead to yet more social turmoil.

So it seems to me that the problems of this new medical technology probably outweigh the possible advantages, and it shouldn't be pursued. But unfortunately, as with generative AI, there are no practical controls for dangerous new profit-making technologies in our society, so it may really come about. 

"It’s this idea which lies at the heart of Neuroscientist Dr. Zeleznikow-Johnston’s new book, The Future Loves You: How and Why We Should Abolish Death. A manifesto for – and road map to, he hopes – today’s terminally diseased and dying being offered a pause button of their own. A chance to halt their biological clocks, until such a time that science and medicine has advanced sufficiently.

........................................................................................................................................

Just as it’s the words printed in a book, rather than the specific ink used to form them, that gives its pages meaning, Zeleznikow-Johnston believes the same to be true of you and I. Here lies the heart of Zeleznikow-Johnston’s proposition. “If that’s the case, then what can we do now to preserve these identities, when we can’t currently cure someone’s health issue, but might in the future, if only we could buy some time.”

With current technology, Zeleznikow-Johnston believes, this is already possible; scientifically straightforward, too. There are the obvious examples where we press pause already: sperm, eggs or embryos can be frozen in stasis for decades before being implanted. “What you’re likely less aware of,” he says, “are other analogous surgical procedures already in use. Sometimes, during surgery for aneurysms, or damage to blood vessels around the heart, doctors cannot simply route around with bypasses.” Blood flow in these bodies needs halting if an operation has any chance of success. In normal circumstances, this would prove fatal. For decades, however, surgeons have been circumventing death with a technique known as deep hypothermic circulatory arrest.

.........................................................................................................................................

Now, Zeleznikow-Johnston offers an alternative suggestion: aldehyde-stabilised cryopreservation, also known as fixation. “Essentially,” he says, “by introducing chemicals at the opportune moment which preserve the structure of someone’s brain, we can hold onto its circuitry and structures.”

Once frozen, in essence, preserving our identity indefinitely. “In labs, this process of fixation is used routinely with animal research. Developed in 2015, it’s not a complicated procedure and has been tested on large animals and humans, postmortem.”


Two groups on the US west coast, Zeleznikow-Johnston tells me, are on the cusp of offering this to the public. Another in Europe. “It can certainly be done today,” he’s confident, “and in the next year, it’ll be more accessible. It could be rolled out quickly, if there was demand.”

............................................................................................................................................


But how we might eventually resurrect remains unclear. What use is pressing pause without a restart button? There, he accepts, we’re firmly into the field of sci-fi. Unfazed, Zeleznikow-Johnston opines that major advances in nanomedicine offer one route; else there’s what’s known as mind-uploading, or mind-emulation – transferring someone to a digital form. “Break down the elements and it’s a fairly straightforward extrapolation from today’s technology,” he says. “Take very high resolution scans of brain structure to characterise how someone’s neurons work, recreate it in a digital format then put it in another robotic, virtual or biological body.” Future scientists will need to fill in the details. “Yet if the memories and experiences which define us are held on to, a person has survived. A robotic or digital brain, if done right, I’d argue, is still you.”

If tomorrow, Zeleznikow-Johnston received a terminal diagnosis, he’d eventually undergo the brain preservation procedure. He’d encourage friends and family to follow. “My fear of death hasn’t been assuaged,” he says. “It still scares me. What I’m proposing isn’t magic, even if it comes to fruition.” Countless variables would need to land in our favour: the tech developed and implemented properly. Nuclear war and climate catastrophe avoided. Some future generation opting to offer their distant ancestors another chance at life. “Even with a guarantee of everyone I love returning, I’d still miss them in the short term, but it does provide some comfort. My existential despair that everyone I love will one day disappear hasn’t gone away completely, but it offers a glimmer of hope.”

[Laird]

I think that this developing technique is possibly dangerous and destructive from at least three major problems.

I agree that the three items you list are indeed problems. Here's a fourth:

When life is very, very long, or even indefinite, one has much more to lose in dying, and might, then, ironically, become even more fearful of death, and in general very risk-averse, just like the rich man with a pile of gold in his home barricades it up and lives in constant fear of being robbed, whereas the poor man is free of that burden.

Of course mostly everybody would like to live for a very long time though not presumably forever, but I think that this developing technique is possibly dangerous and destructive from at least three major problems. The most important of these problems would relate to a proper understanding of the essentially spiritual nature of human beings. If looked at from this standpoint, this proposed "live forever" medical technology could seriously interfere with the underlying basic purpose of the Earth existence of human beings. There is (contrary to conventional materialist neuroscience) a lot of strong empirical evidence and philosphical arguments for the existence of an afterlife and of reincarnation, and of course the existence of a soul or spirit. This is still scoffed at by the physicalists, but they stand on unfirm ground.

We couldn't predict what problems will incur if the basic designed-by-the-powers-that-be purposes of human life and death on the Earth are so drastically interfered with. Presumable there could be very negative consequences.

The second major problem of this apparently possible new indefinitely life-preserving medical technology would be in the social turmoil due to the probable resultant overpopulation and consequent exhaustion of natural resources that would ensue without drastic birth control measures.  There would have to be massive social changes.

Once upon a time humans were monkeys. Once upon a time it was rare for people to live past 50. Nowdays people can live for nearly a hundred years and survive things that would normally end them. In 100 years there's no saying what human beings will be able to survive. In 1000 years there's no saying what we will even consider a human being to be anymore. 

If there's any underlying spiritual purpose of human beings I very much doubt it gives even the slightest shit about change. There's always room for speculation, but reality should never be ignored. One day humans will be as different to modern day humans as we are to frogs and that should be taken into account when considering things like this. 

As for the issue with indefintitely life preserving medical technology, it's important to take examples from real life too. People decide to die all the time, eventually life can just get too tiring. I think people having the option to decide when they die would be amazing. Fear of death is one part biological, one part social. And that goes for both people who live in an afterlife and ones who don't. If we had a much more death 'friendly' culture there wouldn't be as much of an issue, but that just ain't how it works right now.

Once upon a time humans were monkeys. Once upon a time it was rare for people to live past 50. Nowdays people can live for nearly a hundred years and survive things that would normally end them. In 100 years there's no saying what human beings will be able to survive. In 1000 years there's no saying what we will even consider a human being to be anymore. 

If there's any underlying spiritual purpose of human beings I very much doubt it gives even the slightest shit about change. There's always room for speculation, but reality should never be ignored. One day humans will be as different to modern day humans as we are to frogs and that should be taken into account when considering things like this. 

As for the issue with indefintitely life preserving medical technology, it's important to take examples from real life too. People decide to die all the time, eventually life can just get too tiring. I think people having the option to decide when they die would be amazing. Fear of death is one part biological, one part social. And that goes for both people who live in an afterlife and ones who don't. If we had a much more death 'friendly' culture there wouldn't be as much of an issue, but that just ain't how it works right now.

If as you say the (grim) reality of human life is that there probably is no purpose at all for humans existing on this Earth, then the clear implications of this assertion are that the materialists are right and undirected Darwinian semi random walk RM + NS evolution is how mankind came about, the origin of humans was an entirely stochastic semi-random material process with no meaning whatsoever, and all the received wisdom of the ages is nonsense and superstition concerning the supposed reasons for incarnating for successive limited lifetimes (mainly having to do with learning lessons that only can be learned in a limited environment), along with experiencing adversity and death and learning it is not the end, where the true home of the soul is a spiritual realm.
 
However, all these implications are invalidated by the existence of a boatload of empirical paranormal evidence for a spiritual order of existence including the soul , an afterlife, and reincarnation, and also reams of strong physical evidence against Darwinism and for Intelligent Design as the main agent of evolution. ID requires the existence of superintelligent agents outside the natural physical order, presumably also sharing in the overall purposes of setting up the human drama. This is not even to mention the strong logical philosophical arguments against materialism and for the immateriality of consciousness. Of course all this evidence and philosophical logic is scoffed at by mainstream scientistic academia, along with the majority of the public, brainwashed by generations of scientistic indoctrination through the school systems.

This entire argument reflects a true cultural clash in our society. 

Anyway, indefinite prolongation of physical life in the body would completely abrogate the entire spiritual side of human existence (for which there is much evidence) and it (human existence) would have no ultimate meaning, as simple atoms in a void have no inherent meaning.

I suspect this is the lead in to some doomed-to-fail, but will get investment in the short term, start up.

Enough rich people fear death and also believe in nonsense like Computationalism...and you know what they say about fools & their money..

If as you say the (grim) reality of human life is that there probably is no purpose at all for humans existing on this Earth, then the clear implications of this assertion are that the materialists are right and undirected Darwinian semi random walk RM + NS evolution is how mankind came about, the origin of humans was an entirely stochastic semi-random material process with no meaning whatsoever, and all the received wisdom of the ages is nonsense and superstition concerning the supposed reasons for incarnating for successive limited lifetimes (mainly having to do with learning lessons that only can be learned in a limited environment), along with experiencing adversity and death and learning it is not the end, where the true home of the soul is a spiritual realm.
 
However, all these implications are invalidated by the existence of a boatload of empirical paranormal evidence for a spiritual order of existence including the soul , an afterlife, and reincarnation, and also reams of strong physical evidence against Darwinism and for Intelligent Design as the main agent of evolution. ID requires the existence of superintelligent agents outside the natural physical order, presumably also sharing in the overall purposes of setting up the human drama. This is not even to mention the strong logical philosophical arguments against materialism and for the immateriality of consciousness. Of course all this evidence and philosophical logic is scoffed at by mainstream scientistic academia, along with the majority of the public, brainwashed by generations of scientistic indoctrination through the school systems.

This entire argument reflects a true cultural clash in our society. 

Anyway, indefinite prolongation of physical life in the body would completely abrogate the entire spiritual side of human existence (for which there is much evidence) and it (human existence) would have no ultimate meaning, as simple atoms in a void have no inherent meaning.

I think this is just all a bit of closed minded thinking to be honest. Paranormal evidence does exist and it does paint a picture of existence and what it might mean, but does that mean there's some grand overarching point to it all? I haven't seen anything RELIABLE to think there is. Was there a grand spirutal purpose at the beginning of the universe? Did billions of years pass purely for the purpose of waiting for humans to evolve? History of religion paints a powerful picture of how spiritual beliefs have evolved over time and it works both in the ways of seeing where some root truths may lie and also how things have changed, with experiences changing along with them. And as humanity (hopefully) continues to exist far far into the future I expect things to continue to change.

There being no grand overall meaning to existence does not invalidate the existence of parasychological phenomena. Perhaps it is just the way the universe operates and this is just where we find ourselves, naturalistic with a hint of paranormal in the end. It may end up being the case that the people who believe in it and the people that don't share the same struggle, having to find their own meaning in an existence that doesn't provide one. Just that if any afterlife is true we might have to be doing it for a biiiiit longer than we thought we would. 

Only if you firmly believe in potentially rigid spiritual rules does the prolongation of physical life end up being a bad thing. Like I said in my last comment, the average age going from something like 50 to something like 80 hasn't really had any effect that we can see. Might as well stretch it out longer and see what happens. Regardless of any afterlife that occurs, we only get ONE life as US. Not a reincarnation, not a spiritual existence, one life here on earth where we can enjoy the things that happen in this short span of time as the person we are now. Might as well make it last a bit longer if we can and decide to go out when we feel like it.

Only if you firmly believe in potentially rigid spiritual rules does the prolongation of physical life end up being a bad thing. Like I said in my last comment, the average age going from something like 50 to something like 80 hasn't really had any effect that we can see.

No effect? How about the date at which people can start to receive a pension? In the UK it has increased from 60 (women) and 65 (men) to current 66, soon to be 67 and moving up to 70 and beyond. All this means is people having to spend a greater percentage of their lives working, often in lower-paid roles just to survive. Getting old isn't always fun.

There’s no more reality to this so-called 'brain-preserving' procedure than to the idea of extraterrestrial aliens flying around the American desert.

Dr. Zeleznikow-Johnston seems to be approaching this primarily from a philosophical and commercial angle, aiming to sell his provocative book.