Jump to content

Welcome to FutureTimeline.forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Why do you think very few countries allow cryonics?


  • Please log in to reply
30 replies to this topic

#21
Kombaticus

Kombaticus

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 693 posts
I will accompany you all at our round table in orbit in 2000 years.

"Let teachers and priests and philosophers brood over questions of reality and illusion. I know this: if life is an illusion, then I am no less an illusion, and being thus, the illusion is real to me. I live, I burn with life, I love, I slay, and I am content." -Conan the Cimmerian


#22
SG-1

SG-1

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,653 posts
  • LocationUS - Arkansas
Whoa who let out the all caps rage lol? Average lifespan is around 70, it would be normal for someone to live into their 80s maybe even 90s. So 20 years is not that much of a difference when you think about it. If I died at the same date that you did, or a 35 year old, no one would think it was strange. I hope we all live to see it, whenever it is. It looks like we all have good chances, but they are just chances. Back to the topic, I do think cryonics or something similar will be available to people under 40~50 today by the time they kick the can, which is awesome.

Hey.  Stop reading.  The post is over.


#23
kjaggard

kjaggard

    Artificer

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,987 posts
  • Locationwhere fanciful imaginings and hard won knowledge meet to genesis the future.
If i've any say in the fight for my lifespan I'll at least make it to 92. that 55 and a half years from now. 2067 ish. If we havn't gotten some serious shit figured out by then that could replace damaged organs and preserve my brains function inside entirely rebuilt bodies, even just hypothetically based on available tech, then it's not going to happen in the next 100 years. But I think with a lot of the research going on right now that most of us will see means of extending our lives on the other side of 2030. Enough that cancer, heart disease, diabetes and autoimmune disease will be conditions we can recover from and at least mange indefinately if not completely reverse. These are major health problems leading to death now. and most of them are factors in old age. But we could also see major improvements in emergency response and trauma medicine. If I were to guess, I'd say by 2037 we can expect to live to an age of 115 barring major trauma in isolated areas of the world. By 2060 I suspect that we should be able destroy cancers and guard against regrowth, reverse diabetes, replace ailing hearts with new ones made from our own cells, and if I dare believes some of the stuff I've read recently have an artificial immune system that can be programmed, which can either augment and regulate the native immune system or replace it. all of which would leave the life expectancy of the human being up to the longevity of the brain. we might be able to hook up external memory and add processing power to speed things up but they won't be us yet and the tissues that are us will still age and wither. But by then we should have testable neural stemcell therapies that could be used as recharges. Wild guess, by 2063 we can expect to reach 180 about as often as not. and if you make it toward the end of that chunk of time, we early adopters of the longevity mindset could well see 1000 or more. If that happens It'll be interesting to look up in the martian sky and see earth as that tiny dot on my 164th birthday as I prepare for some additional treatment and then set forth for an adventure beyond mars colony, thinking back on all that I've seen happen.
Live content within small means. Seek elegance rather than luxury, Grace over fashion and wealth over riches.
Listen to clouds and mountains, children and sages. Act bravely, think boldly.
Await occasions, never make haste. Find wonder and awe, by experiencing the everyday.

#24
kjaggard

kjaggard

    Artificer

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,987 posts
  • Locationwhere fanciful imaginings and hard won knowledge meet to genesis the future.
oh and to the original topic of why cryo isn't more commonly accepted: because until it's shown medical treatment rather than elaborate death ritual people will continue to see it as being regulated as body disposal methods rather than life support. until you can vitrify a heart and store it in a tank for five months and then revive it get it beating and implant it for 1, 3, and 5 year study of the effects, nobody is going to take it seriously as a medical proceedure. as a means of dealing with dead bodies, it will fall prey to concerns about disease and rotting and smell and concerns of family for the treatment and visitation ect. believe me there are people who would rather know they could visit an urn of ashes on the mantel or in some marble hallway in a cemetary then a frozen severed head in some lab somewhere they can't always get access to. Even when you get past the point when people no longer think it's some elaborate reimagining of the mummification rituals only for sci-fi nerds, you will still face people who think it's self centered to think that you are more worthy of living forever than all those others who live a natural life span and "died with dignity" or who talk about how boring long life would be.
Live content within small means. Seek elegance rather than luxury, Grace over fashion and wealth over riches.
Listen to clouds and mountains, children and sages. Act bravely, think boldly.
Await occasions, never make haste. Find wonder and awe, by experiencing the everyday.

#25
Italian Ufo

Italian Ufo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,190 posts
My only concern are prices...how fast will they drop for regenerative medicine?? Right now the first company that are using your own stem cells ask around 6.000 to 14.000 dollars for a single injection that does not even guarantee results...it is crazy.. thats another reason i may stay single for at least this century...if i live just by myself I increase the chances to live longer i think i have to save a lots of money.

#26
Lily

Lily

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 720 posts
  • LocationBerlin

My only concern are prices...how fast will they drop for regenerative medicine?? Right now the first company that are using your own stem cells ask around 6.000 to 14.000 dollars for a single injection that does not even guarantee results...it is crazy..
thats another reason i may stay single for at least this century...if i live just by myself I increase the chances to live longer i think i have to save a lots of money.


As long as it is by choice and you don't feel stressed out becaus eof it, it may be a way to save money, yes. But if you feel depressed, lonely etc. and have to kind of force yourself to stay single, well, that wouldn't be good for your life expectation if recent studies are something to go by.

"All scientific advancement due to intellegence overcoming, compensating, for limitations. Can't carry a load, so invent wheel. Can't catch food, so invent spear. Limitations. No limitations, no advancement. No advancement, culture stagnates. Works other way too. Advancement before culture is ready. Disastrous."

There's definitely truth in that...


#27
Italian Ufo

Italian Ufo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,190 posts


My only concern are prices...how fast will they drop for regenerative medicine?? Right now the first company that are using your own stem cells ask around 6.000 to 14.000 dollars for a single injection that does not even guarantee results...it is crazy..
thats another reason i may stay single for at least this century...if i live just by myself I increase the chances to live longer i think i have to save a lots of money.


As long as it is by choice and you don't feel stressed out becaus eof it, it may be a way to save money, yes. But if you feel depressed, lonely etc. and have to kind of force yourself to stay single, well, that wouldn't be good for your life expectation if recent studies are something to go by.


being single as its advantages and disvantanges..and so being in a relationship
you just need to gamble right among these two situations anyway.
I know many who have are depressed while having a family.... no more sex, lots of economic problems, boredom, children who are not what they expect etc...
but you may be happy in a family ( although this became extremely rare todayI

on the other hand being single you know yourself, you can have different parthners, you can go naked around your house without worrying about others, putting loud music while you are taking a bath..you also have a good econmic income...so you can buy lots of nice things..
the downturns are that sometimes you may feel lonely at times and when you are sick you usually don't have anyone who takes care of you...
it happned to me for the first time in 2011 at Brunel University...I was sick alone in my room on campus for Christmas and the entire building was empty...my mom coulndt come because the airports was closed because of snow...
the campus was a desert city! I was very sick and I coulldnt step out to the closest pharmacy..i am glad my friends from Iraq were still on campus and they brought me medicines and food ( which i ran out )...
this last episode made me reflect..but eventually in the future you will call a service from your portable and they will deliver good straight at home.

#28
SG-1

SG-1

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,653 posts
  • LocationUS - Arkansas
Personally I wouldn't want to be single for most of my adult life. The reason people suck at marriages is because they rush things and don't have any insight, they just get infatuated and can't see clearly. Plus I get crazy when I don't have people to talk to lol, empty houses are so depressing.

Hey.  Stop reading.  The post is over.


#29
Alric

Alric

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,053 posts
Probably the two worst things in a marriage is bad communication and unrealistic expectations.

#30
Italian Ufo

Italian Ufo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,190 posts

Personally I wouldn't want to be single for most of my adult life.
The reason people suck at marriages is because they rush things and don't have any insight, they just get infatuated and can't see clearly.
Plus I get crazy when I don't have people to talk to lol, empty houses are so depressing.


what about to have a sexy robot like this ? Would you still be lonely

I hope the "nudity" of this image is accetable

Posted Image


Jokes apart I think virtual reality will reduce this sense of lonilenss.

But I understand you, everyone react diffrently to ceirtain eviroments...
thats why I am undecided... marrige is a big risk...
how can I know that I will be still attracted to you in 10 years? how can i know that we don't grow apart?
how can i be sure we will always get along?

if things go wrong you will be even more depressed then being single...you will go through a lots of stress, divorce, angry disatisfied kids, spousal maintenances etc...so think about this risk...
also if you live 500 years or more do you think you will always be with the same lady that long??

As for me now i live things open... i have to think about it

#31
Casey

Casey

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 673 posts

If I were to guess, I'd say by 2037 we can expect to live to an age of 115 barring major trauma in isolated areas of the world.

Wild guess, by 2063 we can expect to reach 180 about as often as not. and if you make it toward the end of that chunk of time, we early adopters of the longevity mindset could well see 1000 or more.


Is this just for young people, or for anyone who's alive during these times? If someone was born in 1948, would their life expectancy be 115 if they live to 2037, and 180 if they live until 2063?

I've said this before, but I don't want an indefinite, milennia-spanning life unless my parents and siblings are there to share it with me. I'm sure that me and my siblings might be young enough to enjoy the miracles of the future (the oldest of us five turned 36 in June), but my parents, who were born in 1948 and 1952, are borderline far as I can tell... the oldest generation that might be able to reap said miracles, but it will be a challenge to reach them. I'm hoping that artificial enhancements and cryogenic freezing and things of that nature will be enough to help them reach the finish line, help them reach a time where aging can be halted and even reversed.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users