# 14 year old with cancer just won the right to have her body frozen.



## FireFox (Nov 19, 2016)

Full article here:

http://www.sciencealert.com/a-14-ye...-science-behind-it?perpetual=yes&limitstart=1


----------



## P4-630 (Nov 19, 2016)

.....


----------



## FireFox (Nov 19, 2016)

P4-630 said:


> .....


I know it's scary but i don't know if such a thing one day would be possible.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Nov 19, 2016)

Whether the science works or not and after you consider the morals behind of scientists preying on the vulnerable and desperate  at least this poor child died with the hope that she would return to her loved ones. 



I doubt whether this will happen in my lifetime
 (or my next one.....)


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Nov 19, 2016)

I'm confident cryogenic freezing causes death.  There will be no coming back from it because the cells themselves are killed by the process of freezing.

I think the only way to prolong someone's life with a terminal illness is to reduce their metabolic rate to the absolute minimum without stopping it.  Inducing coma is the closest to that we've managed thus far.  In the case of severe brain trauma, induced coma has saved lives.


----------



## Xzibit (Nov 19, 2016)

Its already possible


----------



## jboydgolfer (Nov 19, 2016)

FordGT90Concept said:


> I'm confident cryogenic freezing causes death. There will be no coming back from it because the cells themselves are killed by the process of freezing.




 Crystallization Of freezing causes tearing of the tissue etc. on a  Cellular level

 You are correct


----------



## R-T-B (Nov 19, 2016)

She died before they froze her body, so I really don't see the loss.  She was terminally ill.  It comes down to how she wanted to dispose of her body, if nothing else, like the judge says.

I did find the NPU version of this article amazingly distasteful in it's comments section...  but that's not unusual over there for some reason.


----------



## RejZoR (Nov 19, 2016)

There is another issue with this. Anyone watched Forever Young movie from 1992 with Mel Gibson? Sure it's fiction, but it tackles the very same scenario. How would you function when you get revived and you realize EVERYONE you knew are gone, the world you've known is gone. You wake up in entire new world with mentality from the old one. It's a massive psychological stress and don't think many would be able to cope with it. And even if they do, being thrown into entirely new life forced into pretty much learning and adapting to everything new is just not easy. I mean, just look at older people and how difficult it is for them to live with technology and they've been alive while it was being introduced. Now imagine being entirely isolated from it for an entire century. I don't know...


----------



## P4-630 (Nov 19, 2016)

RejZoR said:


> Anyone watched Forever Young movie from 1992 with Mel Gibson? Sure it's fiction


Or "Demolition Man" 1993.


----------



## RejZoR (Nov 19, 2016)

Yes, or Demolition Man. Shows the exact same disconnection from reality. I'm a bit surprised I feel like I'm the first one to bring this up. The rest is just concerned with the freezing itself and the problems it brings, but I'm looking a bit further in the future. They'll have to invest into learning and psychological assistance after defreezing as well. No one seems to be thinking about that...


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Nov 19, 2016)

Blast from the Past is another example.

Just think about the costs associated with keeping a body at or below -150C for a century.  The most plausible scenario is that the system is simply turned off and the corpse cremated.  Personally, I think that cooling energy is better spent on quantum computers to help the living rather than wasted on the dead.

Defying the natural order of things is a blatant display of an oversized ego.


----------



## basco (Nov 19, 2016)

i think when this is possible tech wise then there will be over population and they wont wake up old ones to get more people


----------



## Xzibit (Nov 19, 2016)

Captain America did just fine he even became the leader of some group that goes around avenging stuff.



FordGT90Concept said:


> Just think about the costs associated with keeping a body at or below -150C for a century.  The most plausible scenario is that the system is simply turned off and the corpse cremated.



That's true what happens if they go out of business. I'm sure its covered in legal but i doubt they would spend extra money on ones cremation 10-20yrs down the line.  Imagine being harassed by a debt collector for your great, great, great, great family member.  Cryo un-paid bill for 120yrs.


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Nov 19, 2016)

I see people complaining about being frozen but Captain America came out just fine


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Nov 19, 2016)

One can already make the argument that over population is occurring.

Further, there's no known cures for cancer and there isn't too likely to be a cure.  Even if a treatment is discovered for this girl's cancer, odds are she'll relapse.  Cancer is natures way of weeding out the genetic accidents.


----------



## jboydgolfer (Nov 19, 2016)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Cancer is natures way of weeding out the genetic accidents


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Nov 19, 2016)

I can't find any articles that specify what type of cancer she had.  All of them just say "rare form of cancer."  How enlightening. 

A realtively thorough article that at least points out the judge was deciding between her mother and her father and which of the two are responsible for her post death (ruled in favor of mother):
http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/18/health/uk-teenager-cryonics-body-preservation/index.html

The legal case was not about whether or not it would work.

The fact it took them 8 days to get her from the UK to the cryo facility in Michigan doesn't bode well for her.


The reason why this matters: if the cancer was caught and treated earlier, it may have never progressed to the point of lethality.  UK cancer survival rates trail 10 years behind other European countries .  She could easily be a victim of a nationalized health system that underperforms at diagnosing and treating cancer in general.


----------



## Frick (Nov 19, 2016)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Cancer is natures way of weeding out the genetic accidents.



If I ever have a child, this is the slogan that will be printed on all hers/his clothes.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Nov 19, 2016)

Why do you need a child for that?  Go for it!


----------



## twilyth (Nov 20, 2016)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Cancer is natures way of weeding out the genetic accidents.


You need a lot of "genetic accidents" before cancer develops.  In fact the cells that actually survive the mutations you need to develop cancer are like the seal team 6 of cells.  It's also worth pointing out that viruses, chemical, radiation and a variety of other factors can cause the mutations that lead to cancer so that's kind of a simplistic view.


----------



## Ja.KooLit (Nov 20, 2016)

the winter soldier


----------



## newconroer (Nov 20, 2016)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> Whether the science works or not and after you consider the morals behind of scientists preying on the vulnerable and desperate  at least this poor child died with the hope that she would return to her loved ones.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The real motivation is a toss up between their selfish desire to see their technology work (and make money off it) and their constant undermining of conservative values, such as parents having exclusive rights over their children. Abortion, gender transition therapy and now cold storage are apparently decisions children can make without any consent, because you know, teenagers are a wealth of wisdom and the fact that their 'dreams' and ambitions might be a LITTLE unrealistic (due to their obvious lack of experience in life) is not something we are allowed to consider, because that might suggest we're shaming them in some way.

We wouldn't want to be all mean and give young people an actual reality check would we? We wouldn't want to display love by doing what's right for them. 

It might hurt their feelings, and feelings > facts these days.


----------



## twilyth (Nov 20, 2016)

You're talking about what to do with her corpse.  It's not like it has health consequences.  It's like saying she had no right to determine if she would be buried or cremated.  Who really gives a s*** at that point?


----------



## R-T-B (Nov 20, 2016)

newconroer said:


> The real motivation is a toss up between their selfish desire to see their technology work (and make money off it) and their constant undermining of conservative values, such as parents having exclusive rights over their children. Abortion, gender transition therapy and now cold storage are apparently decisions children can make without any consent, because you know, teenagers are a wealth of wisdom and the fact that their 'dreams' and ambitions might be a LITTLE unrealistic (due to their obvious lack of experience in life) is not something we are allowed to consider, because that might suggest we're shaming them in some way.
> 
> We wouldn't want to be all mean and give young people an actual reality check would we? We wouldn't want to display love by doing what's right for them.
> 
> It might hurt their feelings, and feelings > facts these days.



Just for the record, I'm a pretty hardcore social liberal, and even I find teenagers making decisions on any of the things you just quoted lunacy.

But this is more a case of how she wanted her body disposed of...   that I understand.


----------



## erocker (Nov 21, 2016)

Why would she need to be granted the "right" in the first place?


----------



## dorsetknob (Nov 21, 2016)

would there even be any fuss at all if she chose to bequethe her Body to medical / organ doner /reserch ???
probably not


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Nov 21, 2016)

newconroer said:


> We wouldn't want to be all mean and give young people an actual reality check would we? We wouldn't want to display love by doing what's right for them.


The father tried but, teens, you know, are stubborn and couldn't care less about what their parents think.



erocker said:


> Why would she need to be granted the "right" in the first place?


The cryopreservation process can't be performed unless the individual is legally dead.  She wasn't at the time she wrote the letter requesting to be froze.

I think the wording in the title is misleading.  The legal case was about three things:
1) father whom did not want her frozen from the perspective that if she were restored to life 200 years from now, the life she would likely find (one of poverty and being displaced) is not one he would want for her.
2) mother whom wanted her frozen (don't have the full story here and likely never will).
3) the letter she wrote before dying requesting to be frozen.

Judge decided that the will of the individual (point #3) was more or less legally binding so the court sided with the mother (point #2).



dorsetknob said:


> would there even be any fuss at all if she chose to bequethe her Body to medical / organ doner /reserch ???
> probably not


Absolutely not.  There's nothing extraordinary about that.


----------



## Ungari (Nov 21, 2016)

Cryogenic storage still must be very expensive.
Now that she has the legal right, who is going to pay the bills for this? The mother who wants it, or the father who doesn't?
$125,000?


----------



## jboydgolfer (Nov 21, 2016)

Ungari said:


> Cryogenic storage still must be very expensive.
> Now that she has the legal right, who is going to pay the bills for this? The mother who wants it, or the father who doesn't?



maybe the company who is doing the Freezing will offer a sort of "discount" since she died Pre freeze, and due to disease , and  expectations may be less than bright, so they might see this as an opportunity to fuffill a dying person wishes, and Further the companies/sciences research with a actual body...just a thought , no hard evidence to back this up


----------



## Ungari (Nov 21, 2016)

jboydgolfer said:


> maybe the company who is doing the Freezing will offer a sort of "discount" since she died Pre freeze, and due to disease , and  expectations may be less than bright, so they might see this as an opportunity to fuffill a dying person wishes, and Further the companies/sciences research with a actual body...just a thought , no hard evidence to back this up



You must die "pre-freeze" to do this, otherwise it would be murder.
But my understanding is that this cryogenic service is a business for profit, originally only affordable by the super wealthy.
It would be awful if the father who objected to it, was forced to pay for this.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Nov 21, 2016)

Ungari said:


> Cryogenic storage still must be very expensive.
> Now that she has the legal right, who is going to pay the bills for this? The mother who wants it, or the father who doesn't?
> $125,000?


From CNN:


> The cost of the procedure in the United States -- which the judge said was about £37,000 ($46,000) -- is being met by her maternal grandparents, he said, although the family is not well off. They chose the most basic arrangement, he said, which "simply involves the freezing of the body in perpetuity."


----------



## newconroer (Nov 21, 2016)

R-T-B said:


> Just for the record, I'm a pretty hardcore social liberal, and even I find teenagers making decisions on any of the things you just quoted lunacy.
> 
> But this is more a case of how she wanted her body disposed of...   that I understand.




This isn't about disposal, because the procedure is there to ensure the body is preserved and potentially revived.


----------



## R-T-B (Nov 21, 2016)

newconroer said:


> I don't believe that's the case, there's more to it than that.
> And whom is going to pay for it?



All your questions above have been answered in this thread.


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Nov 21, 2016)

newconroer said:


> the procedure is there to ensure the body is preserved and potentially revived.



Has anyone ever been brought back from the dead though?  Im not just talking about someone  whose literally snuffed it within the last 5 mins due to accident or other health issues.  So minus CPR and use of a defibrillator


----------



## twilyth (Nov 21, 2016)

That $46k figure for full body suspension doesn't sound right.  I know that Alcor charges about 4  times that for full body suspension - http://www.alcor.org/Library/html/CostOfCryonics.html - but that does include a variety of extra costs.


----------



## R-T-B (Nov 21, 2016)

FreedomEclipse said:


> Has anyone ever been brought back from the dead though?  Im not just talking about someone  whose literally snuffed it within the last 5 mins due to accident or other health issues.  So minus CPR and use of a defibrillator



I believe yes, but not with humans.  And only in general with creatures that tend to survive freezing in nature (there are a few examples).


----------



## dorsetknob (Nov 21, 2016)

R-T-B said:


> And only in general with creatures that tend to survive freezing in nature (there are a few examples).



 Certain Frogs for Example


----------



## R-T-B (Nov 21, 2016)

dorsetknob said:


> Certain Frogs for Example



How do you think I knew?


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Nov 21, 2016)

R-T-B said:


> I believe yes, but not with humans.  And only in general with creatures that tend to survive freezing in nature (there are a few examples).




Cavemen not being at the top of the list then


----------



## R-T-B (Nov 21, 2016)

FreedomEclipse said:


> Cavemen not being at the top of the list then



Only in bad scooby doo episodes, and even then it was some dude in a costume.


----------

