Bringing things back....

McLaren · Jun 28, 2005

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,15739502-13762,00.html

What are your thoughts on this very wierd science expriment.
The link is about how scientists brought back dogs to life through a detailed procedure in the article.

What do you think of this? Good idea or bad idea since they want to try this on humans.

Lee · Jun 28, 2005

religous groups will not like that at all i dont think but for the sake of humanity im up for it!!

TheCracker · Jun 28, 2005

Any advances in medical science are welcome IMO.

- can't see many 'Jovos' going for it..

Arwin · Jun 28, 2005

It's a weird idea, but if you've been following science a little you could see it coming from miles off. Anyway, I think its good. But we'll have to continue also to advance in the fields of family planning, or else perhaps interstellar flight and planet colonisation.

sicbeing · Jun 28, 2005

"So, you've been dead for a few hours, what does God look like?"

Touring Mars · Jun 28, 2005

I thought this was another one of those fakes, like all those daft BBC fakes... but it certainly looks totally for real... it's certainly bizarre... but it could well have some huge implications...

P.S. I also thought this thread was going to be about what people think about taking things back to the store... :dunce:

ledhed · Jun 28, 2005

Great now I can go back to partying my arse off till I die and then get frozen so the doctors can bring me back in the future like I planned ...what a relief ! I thought I was in trouble there for a while .

blargonator · Jun 29, 2005

it sounds a bit crazy to me, but then again so does dying and that happens to everyone. you think people would lose their 21 grams when they come back :nervous:

? anyways, I am completely for it. the possibilities are endless, most of us have felt the pain of having family members die, after death there is nothing but memories, having the chance to say goodbye could be one of the greatest gifts given by science.
p.s. im glad someone posted on this, i read the article earlier today and i was amazed and thought about posting on it too

the_undrtaker89 · Jun 29, 2005

That's kinda wierd and it happened sooner then i thought it would. Do you think that when they revive it, that the dog still has it's same mind.? Or is it unaware that its been brought back to life. And if this was possible for humans I think it could cause mass over population. I think it should only be used for people who were in an accident not those who die from age.

SS69 · Jun 30, 2005

I dont see how it can work. As it is if the human brain is dead for 6 minutes and are still brought back to life there is always some brain damage.

a6m5 · Jul 1, 2005

sicbeing
"So, you've been dead for a few hours, what does God look like?"

When you're dead, you're dead. You don't see God, until the judgement day.

Touring Mars
P.S. I also thought this thread was going to be about what people think about taking things back to the store...

So did I!

SS69
I dont see how it can work. As it is if the human brain is dead for 6 minutes and are still brought back to life there is always some brain damage.

I was wondering the same thing. I guess, more testing will reveal the details.

My take: I'm religious, but I don't see any problem with this method. If it really work and can save lives, why not?

Tacet_Blue · Jul 1, 2005

blargonator
it sounds a bit crazy to me, but then again so does dying and that happens to everyone. you think people would lose their 21 grams when they come back ?

That 21 grams story is a fairy tale. It comes from an experiment in 1910.
A bed was constructed on a large beam balancing scale (which was not even accurate to 21 grams!)
Obviously the experimenter was not allowed to euthanise his patients and was only given about 6 terminally ill volunteers. Not much of a sample, the results were terrible.
Due to the nature of death, most people struggled as they died, and the beam would shake making a reading impossible.
Some patients actually put on weight, and just one lost the now mythical 21 grams.
No one has repeated the experiment, and its results have been universally denounced.

Incidentally he also tried it with dogs, as he was allowed to gas them. This meant they died without struggling so the beam was stable...the dogs showed no loss or gain...but this fit in with his theory as dogs don't have souls...how convenient

SS69
I dont see how it can work. As it is if the human brain is dead for 6 minutes and are still brought back to life there is always some brain damage.

Brain damage occurs when oxygen stops going to the brain and the brain starts to go off, like food left out on a hot day. In this case the saline solution is chilled to just above zero and the dogs core temp is around 7 degrees. This is a bit like putting fresh meat in a fridge

It will stay good for up to five days, so there will be very little cellular decay, if any, in the brain after a few hours.

The problem before with cryogenics, was that when the body is frozen, ice crystals form. On thawing, these crystals puncture cell walls and cause massive damage. Brain damage occurs during this process.
This new technique avoids this by not freezing, but instead chilling.

This could be invaluable to get someone to treatment from a remote location, but as for interstellar travel...five days just isn't long enough..cellular decay will have started by then.

blargonator · Jul 4, 2005

thanks for clearing that up tacet_blue <8- ) i never actually believed our souls (im not asking for an argument, its simply my belief i have one, you don't have to have one if you don't want one to keep the non-religious people happy <8- P) are physical things that have a set amount of weight.

i was eating dinner with some friends and their family and their father works for the catholic church and i happened to bring this up and then he explained that animals such as dogs do have souls, they are just not eternal(?) i can't really say anymore on the subject because i don't know anything else about it.....

Tacet_Blue · Jul 4, 2005

blargonator
thanks for clearing that up tacet_blue <8- ) i never actually believed our souls [snip] are physical things that have a set amount of weight.

Exactly, even if you believe in a "soul" why on earth would anyone think it had a weight! :lol:

There are a lot of crazy people out there looking for physical evidence to prove the metaphysical :crazy:

Total waste of time

Pebb · Jul 4, 2005

This news has been flying around the interweb on so many forums like a T-Virus.

Draken_crovax · Jul 4, 2005

this could be a major life saving use in cases where people need an organ transplant thats just hours away, but as always every religious group will jump all over this

Sage · Jul 4, 2005

I'm not, uh, medically-inclined, so I have a question: If you die of natural causes (say, your heart's tired), what would happen if they did this to you? Would you live for a little bit and then die again? What if they replaced your heart?

Tacet_Blue · Jul 4, 2005

Sage
I'm not, uh, medically-inclined, so I have a question: If you die of natural causes (say, your heart's tired), what would happen if they did this to you? Would you live for a little bit and then die again? What if they replaced your heart?

All this process does is stop the body, and more importantly the brain, decaying in the event of death.
So yes if you died of natural causes such as a heart attack and no donor heart was available, then you may be able to wait a bit longer than you could at the moment.

The process does not cure the underlying disease or condition but merely keeps the body in an approximation of stasis

I am guessing that the maximum time this process will prevent decay is only about 5 days.

Sage · Jul 4, 2005

What if you die of "old age"? (I realize that's a vague term, which is why it's in quotes.

) I guess what I'm trying to get at is: Is immortality possible with this? Or would that require too much body-part-replacing?

xcsti · Jul 5, 2005

Sage
What if you die of "old age"? (I realize that's a vague term, which is why it's in quotes. ) I guess what I'm trying to get at is: Is immortality possible with this? Or would that require too much body-part-replacing?

I'm pretty sure it wouldn't help you if you died of old age. They would be able to revive you but you wouldn't live long after wards.

I remember watching a discovery channel thing on people who survived falling in near zero water. It said that there were three groups of people. The first were only in the water momentarily ( < 1 min) and recieved little or no brain damage. The second group who were under long enough to lose consciousness but were revived (3-8 mins) most of whom suffered significant brain damage. The last group was of people who had been under for longer periods (>10, almost all of which had been medically dead but were then revived. The majority of this group (well those that survived) had suffered little damage to their brain.

Tacet_Blue · Jul 5, 2005

Sage
What if you die of "old age"? (I realize that's a vague term, which is why it's in quotes. ) I guess what I'm trying to get at is: Is immortality possible with this? Or would that require too much body-part-replacing?

The idea would be to replace the body parts before they failed and caused you to die

In some science fiction books, Neuromancer (1984) being a good example, the very rich live for hundreds of years by replacing organs and blood regularly. One of the richest and most powerful people called Armitage is so old his life is maintained in a "Vat". You can only meet him in a virtual world. In the book they say, none of the very rich are truly alive anymore, but they are "immortal".

Even Mr Burns from the simpsons has his blood replaced every few months to prolong his life :lol:

The process with the dogs is just like putting you in a fridge to buy some time before you can be treated.
If they try to revive you and the original problem (faulty heart) is still there, then you won't be revived.

Sage · Jul 5, 2005

Ah, gotcha. Thanks for clearing that up.

katana87 · Jul 5, 2005

Man this all sounds too scary. Makes me think of all those Return of the Dead movies. But I'm cool with it don't see a problem as long as its doesn't cost too much. But I don't think this will be out till the 2030. Hey wait, won't the cells die after a while so nerves would be gone and so on. This might not just be the best Idea. Whats the point of being revived if you come out retarded? :indiff:

IA

Tacet_Blue · Jul 5, 2005

katana87
Hey wait, won't the cells die after a while so nerves would be gone and so on. This might not just be the best Idea. Whats the point of being revived if you come out retarded?
IA

Yes the cells start dying as soon as oxygenating blood stops reaching them. That's why they use a very cold liquid.

Just like a fridge can put off the decay process so does this technique. It won't stop decay forever, as the temp is above freezing and bacteria will still divide, even if it is at a very slow rate due to the temp.

Freezing will stop bacteria dividing and you could keep a body indefinitely, but the ice crystal complication I mentioned earlier means this technique has not been successful yet.

I'm sure I'm repeating myself

Anyway what am I a cryogenic expert :lol:

I'm surprised Famine isn't in on this one...all I'll say to finish is...Neuromancer is one hell of a good book 👍

xcsti · Jul 5, 2005

Tacet_Blue
If they try to revive you and the original problem (faulty heart) is still there, then you won't be revived.

It would be possible for you to be revived, just very likely that the problem would reoccur.

Ev0 · Jul 5, 2005

Interesting development. Also, very interesting discussion we've got going on, keep it up guys, great reading! 👍

Also, a related question. How long has reviving people from a state of clinical death been possible? I'm pretty sure it happens now on a fairly regular basis (mainly with heart attack vicitims I'd assume), but I'm wondering how long we have been aware of this occuring.

Slick Rick · Jul 5, 2005

That story reminds me of that old man in the Simpsons who locks himself in Apu's Freezer to wake up in the future.

'moon pie?...what a time to be alive!'

Seriously. They may be right about saving lives of people with severe blood loss and my opinion is it isnt as half as bad as cloning and stuff like that. But there should be a limit as to how long they can keep you in that state. I dont think its right, even if that person agrees, to have anyone in that state longer than a year.

skicrush · Jul 7, 2005

The ice crystal thing is when they freeze you--water expands as it freezes, and bursts cells and such. This is not actually freezing. Its saline, so the water doesn't absorb minerals you need. And you're not actually dead--more like asleep. For a couple hours, people. Not days. Like the kid that fell through the ice a few years back, who was dead for 45 minutes with no brain damage. I think that's why they kept making the distinction "clinically dead" in the article. Other than JWs, who have major issues with most of modern medicine, I don't see why any religious groups would care too much. It sounds like a great thing.
But one things is for sure--Doctors are going to need warmer gloves than those skinny latex ones they've been using!

FoolKiller · Jul 8, 2005

Tacet_Blue
This could be invaluable to get someone to treatment from a remote location, but as for interstellar travel...five days just isn't long enough..cellular decay will have started by then.

Actually if the side effects are minimal (I'd imagine like a headache from sleeping too long or risk of pneumonia) and this can be done on a regular basis to one person imagine if they woke up after five days and then went back in after a day of being awake? A six-month trip to Mars would seem more like a month. So the entire round trip would be only a couple of months to the astronauts. Also considering this is preliminary and could be improved on over time then you could possibly find a way to make it work for interstellar travel. Or combined with improved propulsion systems it could be possible by, maybe (BIG maybe), placing the body in a state that could handle higher G-forces from quicker acceleration.

As for religious groups getting upset over this kind of technology I only see it from the more radical fringes. There is an ethical struggle when you discuss abortion or cloning in order to farm organs. Actually cloning just raises way too many spiritual questions for some to handle and so they immediately deem it unnatural.

To me this simply appears as an extreme form of sedative or anesthetic. The article played bad wording by saying "zombie". I don;'t see this as taking something that is dead or has been dead and reviving it. It could only be used to take someone who is dying and slowing their body down in order to treat them before the death occurs. But, as I said the radical fringes will definitely find a way to consider this unnatural because you remove the blood.

Tacet_Blue · Jul 8, 2005

skicrush
And you're not actually dead--more like asleep. For a couple hours, people. Not days. Like the kid that fell through the ice a few years back, who was dead for 45 minutes with no brain damage. I think that's why they kept making the distinction "clinically dead" in the article.

No brain activity qualifies as dead for me

When you sleep you have a great deal of brain activity, alpha waves etc, REM muscle activity, the heart beats and you breathe....Those dogs weren't sleeping, they were clinically dead, that means really really dead

To clarify...you can say someone is dead when their heart stops and they are not breathing...doctors don't give up on them until the brain shows no activity, that is why "clinically dead" is so final, and not a euphemism.

foolkiller79
A six-month trip to Mars would seem more like a month. So the entire round trip would be only a couple of months to the astronauts. Also considering this is preliminary and could be improved on over time then you could possibly find a way to make it work for interstellar travel. Or combined with improved propulsion systems it could be possible by, maybe (BIG maybe), placing the body in a state that could handle higher G-forces from quicker acceleration.

I'll accept that, but I think it is more like a year to get to mars with current propulsion. The biggest payload would be a years supply of food for the crew of five or seven (not to mention the problem of waste disposal). The technique you describe would reduce that by a factor of six, saving a huge amount of weight...so maybe NASA will have a look at it.

The amount of acceleration a body could endure would not change that much, ok there would not be the problem of blackouts, but the G-Forces affect the internal organs and cause damage..in this state they are still liquid and still vulnerable to damage.

Edit: Actually, I've just remembered, putting crew members to sleep like that might not be such a good idea. The Russians were the first to do experiments involving long term exposure to zero gravity. They discovered that the bones and muscles suffer from atrophy and start to become very weak.
On the ISS all kinds of equipment is used to exercise and introduce some forces to the body to stop it become so weak. Sleeping like this would cause severe muscle wasting.

Someone will still have to come up with that gravity generator or copy Arthur C Clarkes revolving craft to introduce a force that way.

Bringing things back....

McLaren

Lee

B-Spec

TheCracker

Nothing to see here...

Arwin

sicbeing

Touring Mars

ツーリングマルス

ledhed

Ultraextreme sanity

blargonator

the_undrtaker89

SS69

a6m5

#ChopOn

Tacet_Blue

blargonator

Tacet_Blue

Pebb

Draken_crovax

Sage

Tacet_Blue

Sage

xcsti

Tacet_Blue

Sage

katana87

Tacet_Blue

xcsti

Ev0

Slick Rick

skicrush

FoolKiller

Don't be a fool.

Tacet_Blue

Similar threads

Latest Posts

Bringing things back....

B-Spec

Nothing to see here...

ツーリング マルス

Ultraextreme sanity

#ChopOn

Don't be a fool.

Similar threads

ツーリングマルス