Gunshot Victims To Be Part of "Suspended Animation" Trials

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Gunshot Victims To Be Part of "Suspended Animation" Trials

Posted by samzenpus on Thursday March 27, 2014 @09:36PM from the between-life-and-death dept.

New submitter Budgreen writes: "Knife-wound or gunshot victims will be cooled down and placed in suspended animation later this month. The technique involves replacing all of a patient's blood with a cold saline solution, which rapidly cools the body and stops almost all cellular activity. 'If a patient comes to us two hours after dying you can't bring them back to life. But if they're dying and you suspend them, you have a chance to bring them back after their structural problems have been fixed,' says surgeon Peter Rheeat from the University of Arizona in Tucson, who helped develop the technique. 10 gunshot and stabbing victims will take part in the trials."

357 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Space travel by geogob · 2014-03-27 21:41 · Score: 5, Interesting

This sounds more like science fiction than anything else to me. But if it works and the technique becomes viable to handle patient with heavy injurie - and assuming the patients can be kept suspended for long periods of time without creating further damages, I wonder if the technique could be adapted for space travel. It would solve a lot of problems related to long-duration interplanetary travel.
The idea is not new. I just wonder if this could be the first step in this direction.
1. Re:Space travel by prefec2 · 2014-03-27 22:14 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  It is very unlikely that we will ever be able to use this technology for deep space travel. First, the distance that grate that you need thousands of years to get there. Therefore, the suspended animation must last that long without chemical decay of cellular structure. Second, all the technology in the ship must last that long. We have no technology which is usable without maintenance for that long. Therefore, self-repair ability for everything including the ship itself must be part of the mission. This looks very much, like the man who wanted to travel around the world in a straight line from Peter Bichsel. Third, all that requires energy, which has to be brought with you.
  In the end it will also not matter, because when these people reach the distant location, there will be no compatible civilization on earth left. If any at all. 10000 years ago we were sitting in caves. Reading books from medieval time in their original writing is almost impossible to most people today and that is only 500-1000 years. There is no point in deep space travel as long as we are not able to go faster than light or at least close to light speed.
2. Re:Space travel by Calydor · 2014-03-27 22:17 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  This sounds more like science fiction than anything else to me.
  I'm sure they said the same thing about organ transplants a hundred years ago.
  
  --
  -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
3. Re:Space travel by geogob · 2014-03-27 22:39 · Score: 2
  
  I agree. This is also why I was pondering about interplanatary travel... Once we are well established on the boundry of our own solar system, I will start to speculate about deep space travel.
4. Re:Space travel by Joce640k · 2014-03-27 22:59 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  The first thing you see when the lid of your cryo-chamber whirrs open will be another human saying, "Hey, we made a warp drive engine while you were asleep!"
  
  --
  No sig today...
5. Re:Space travel by Raumkraut · 2014-03-27 23:00 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  In the end it will also not matter, because when these people reach the distant location, there will be no compatible civilization on earth left.
  People don't generally think of multi-millennium cryo-sleeper journeys as a "there and back" deal, so the state of any civilization on Earth would be pretty much moot once they wake up at the destination.
  That is, unless Earth has advanced so much that FTL Earth ships arrived at the destination before the sleepers did. In which case; "welcome to the world of tomorrow!"
  
  There is no point in deep space travel as long as we are not able to go faster than light or at least close to light speed.
  Perhaps no point for those staying behind, no. But for the pioneers, however long the journey takes, they may well become the first humans to explore and colonise a new planet and star system. If you honestly think that such an amazing achievement is entirely pointless, then I think you might be on the wrong website.
6. Re:Space travel by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-27 23:02 · Score: 0
  
  Deep space has a lot of definitions, you know. Some, like me consider deep space anything beyond the moon. Not sure what GP was talking about though. I was thinking this might or might not be able to get you to the mars and back. Huge saving on weight for life sustaining systems if we can put the crew in even just a low metabolic state. But I doubt this works for more then a few hours. :(
  If our civilization was to expand beyond our star system. We would only need to build a nuclear pulse rocket. It would get us to alpha Centauri in about 85 years. However, I think we might one day build a more realistic nuclear drive rocket that could get us there in say under 500 years. How would we transport ourselves there then??? Well, let's look at the concept of ourselves closer. That would be humans and our civilization. The way to do this would be to send fertilized embryos with an artificial womb to raise them and an automated system to raise the children to adulthood. This system would have to be built and test here or in space. Assuming we can't ever freeze adults. These embryos could be frozen at liquid nitrogen temperatures so chemical decay wouldn't be a problem, though radiation exposure and radioactive decay might case problems on that scale. (probably solvable by using enough embryos and picking only the healthy ones to raise to adulthood.) Of course, the ship would need a way to refine and grow from a very small foot print all the food to raise this kids. Not to mention a way to extract and refine the chemicals and elements for life and ship operation from what every planets are found in the Alpha Centauri system.
  754fad4d0bfd1d03bd8c052df6243801ace4524e76c13cfc1684561a14fa2d71
7. Re:Space travel by Wootery · 2014-03-27 23:23 · Score: 2
  
  In the end it will also not matter, because when these people reach the distant location, there will be no compatible civilization on earth left. If any at all. 10000 years ago we were sitting in caves. Reading books from medieval time in their original writing is almost impossible to most people today and that is only 500-1000 years.
  You're referring to the divergent nature of the evolution of natural languages, right? The difference between the cave-man and the space-traveller is that the latter can be constantly beaming signals back to Earth.
  Even if the languages diverge, and even if the distance between Earth and the space-ship is so great that conversation is impossible, Earth will still have an excellent record of the evolution of their language.
8. Re:Space travel by prefec2 · 2014-03-27 23:35 · Score: 1
  
  Ok. If you think in independent colonies. In that case you need above the previous requirements a really large group to go to the new destination for two reasons. First, to be able to survive in an alien environment you need technology. To understand and maintain such technology you need educated people. Knowledge is already that diverse today that a small group of 1000 people would not suffice. And you should not only send telephone disinfectors ;-) Second, to have a stable population you need genetic diversity which also includes larger groups of people. However, if you managed putting people in stasis and build ships which last thousands of years, you easily can build multiple ships to transport enough people to the new location. Leaving you only with one problem: A large group of people to be willing to leave earth. This only will happen when we fuck up earth totally which we are actually working on.
9. Re:Space travel by hawkinspeter · 2014-03-27 23:47 · Score: 1
  
  It doesn't seem likely that suspended animation would be practical over those time periods, so maybe a better bet for deep space travel is to have colony ships. Don't suspend people, just have a community that lives, reproduces, dies etc.
  
  --
  You're a temporary arrangement of matter sliding towards oblivion in a cold, uncaring universe
10. Re:Space travel by CrimsonAvenger · 2014-03-27 23:55 · Score: 1
  
  You don't need to build multiple ships (except for redundancy).
  The beauty of suspended animation is that you can carry millions of people stacked up like cordwood (asleep), plus a maintenance crew (awake), plus all the machinery required, all in a much smaller space than would be required if everyone were awake the whole voyage.
  
  --
  
  "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
11. Re:Space travel by CrimsonAvenger · 2014-03-27 23:56 · Score: 1
  
  This is also why I was pondering about interplanatary travel.
  Just so. Reduce lifesupport requirements significantly, and a trip to Mars by a 100-man study team becomes (relatively) trivial.
  Or a hundred-man colonization team, for that matter.
  
  --
  
  "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
12. Re:Space travel by MightyYar · 2014-03-27 23:57 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  "And oh, that planet that you were headed for to colonize? Yeah, we terraformed it already, but thanks for the effort."
  
  --
  W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
13. Re:Space travel by ShanghaiBill · 2014-03-28 00:03 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Or a hundred-man colonization team, for that matter.
  That would not be a successful long term colonization effort. But fifty men plus fifty women might be.
14. Re:Space travel by MightyYar · 2014-03-28 00:04 · Score: 1
  
  You could preserve genetic diversity with frozen embryos/sperm/eggs. Could probably fit a lot of "people" on a tiny ship, and they could all be pre-screened for genetic disorders (or any other trait the colonists deem appropriate).
  
  --
  W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
15. Re:Space travel by Joce640k · 2014-03-28 00:05 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  The first successful organ transplant was done in 1883: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
  
  --
  No sig today...
16. Re:Space travel by CrimsonAvenger · 2014-03-28 00:08 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Even better, ten men and ninety women....
  
  --
  
  "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
17. Re:Space travel by prefec2 · 2014-03-28 00:14 · Score: 1
  
  Maintenance crew is out of the question if you want to bridge the distance to another star. Alpha Centauri is approx 30000 years away. So you need auto maintenance.
18. Re:Space travel by ShanghaiBill · 2014-03-28 00:17 · Score: 1
  
  To understand and maintain such technology you need educated people.
  Or advanced robotics and a few terabytes of storage for the knowledge base.
  
  Second, to have a stable population you need genetic diversity which also includes larger groups of people.
  Or a bank of frozen ova and sperm. Or DNA sequences stored on a flash drive. Humans have 98% of their DNA in common, so you would only need to store the 2% of diffs. If properly compressed, all the genetic diversity of the entire human population of the earth would probably fit in a few terabytes.
  
  Leaving you only with one problem: A large group of people to be willing to leave earth.
  There are plenty of qualified people that would leap at the chance to go.
19. Re:Space travel by l0n3s0m3phr34k · 2014-03-28 00:23 · Score: 1
  
  Richard Branson, is that you?
20. Re:Space travel by l0n3s0m3phr34k · 2014-03-28 00:24 · Score: 1
  
  I would hope that FTL ships would go out and find the sleeper ships, instead of just waiting for them.
21. Re:Space travel by squiggleslash · 2014-03-28 00:25 · Score: 2
  
  Sorry to destroy your fantasy with TEH SCIENCE, but it sounds like the optimal configuration would be 100 women and a very well stocked sperm bank...
  
  --
  You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
22. Re:Space travel by CrimsonAvenger · 2014-03-28 00:26 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  What, you don't think that maintenance people know how to screw?
  Or for that matter, if you're carrying a million people, you can wake 100 of them every year for maintenance duties, and then each of them will have spent three years awake for the voyage.
  Note that this assumes that 30K years is correct. At 0.1% of lightspeed, the trip would be closer to 4300 years than 30,000.
  Yes, we don't know how to get to 300 km/s now. We will before we consider going to alphacent. And if we decide to go to alphacent before we can do 300 km/s, well, we'll have 25000 years to figure out how to go 300 km/s and still get to alphacent first with a ship that's going 300 km/s.
  
  --
  
  "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
23. Re:Space travel by dcw3 · 2014-03-28 00:27 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Why would I bring along nine other men???
  
  --
  Just another day in Paradise
24. Re:Space travel by SalafranceUnderhill · 2014-03-28 00:28 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  And by the way, since we hacked the algorithmic and neurological underpinnings of intelligence, way back when, we've been so much smarter than you people that it's just not funny.
  But...
  We think you're *so* adorably kawaii!
  Who's a good boy! Whooo's a gooood boy!
  Mummy loves her little guy, yes she does!
25. Re:Space travel by dcw3 · 2014-03-28 00:29 · Score: 1
  
  Not necessarily. Rotate the crews between suspension, and maintenance duties. Or, only wake a tiny crew occasionally when maintenance is necessary.
  
  --
  Just another day in Paradise
26. Re:Space travel by MancunianMaskMan · 2014-03-28 00:30 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Richard Branson, is that you?
  No, surely it's Dr Strangelove: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt00...
27. Re:Space travel by dcw3 · 2014-03-28 00:34 · Score: 1
  
  Depends upon your definition of "qualified", and is it assumed that they'd never be back to Earth? Or, maybe this is an opportunity to pull all of the guys who live in their mommy's basements out, and allow them to be anti-social together.
  
  --
  Just another day in Paradise
28. Re:Space travel by Joce640k · 2014-03-28 00:51 · Score: 1
  
  Genetic diversity.
  Or maybe all your genes are perfect...?
  
  --
  No sig today...
29. Re:Space travel by dcw3 · 2014-03-28 00:52 · Score: 2
  
  And if it fails, you will never hear about it again.
  I can not help but apply the wisdom if it sounds like a bad idea, it probably is
  Probably the last time anyone here heard about an artificial heart was with the Jarvik 7 back in '82. It might have been considered a failure, though the patient survived for 112 days, he (Barney Clark) asked several times to be allowed to die. Was it a bad idea? Well, there's been plenty of developments in all that time, and it is far from perfected, but I have little doubt that we'll get it right eventually. Or, we could just bury our heads in the sand, and not evolve.
  
  --
  Just another day in Paradise
30. Re:Space travel by prisoner-of-enigma · 2014-03-28 00:52 · Score: 2
  
  But who would kill all the Martian spiders for these women? Hook up their TV and stereo? Change the oil in their Martian sand buggy?
  
  --
  In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
31. Re:Space travel by Riceballsan · 2014-03-28 01:04 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  *we've already terraformed it, developed a society, met other life forms, declared war, and the new planet is now uninhabitable due to the weaponry used in that war.
32. Re:Space travel by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 01:07 · Score: 0
  
  So women are not part of mankind now? The woman I married is, perhaps you should spend less time around sheep.
33. Re:Space travel by ShanghaiBill · 2014-03-28 01:09 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Depends upon your definition of "qualified"
  There would be millions of volunteers. If you need a thousand, you could pick the top 0.1%. I would definitely want to go. If you look at history, there has never been a problem getting people to volunteer for dangerous, one-way missions. In the 1500's, there was no shortage of colonists heading out of Europe. The Polynesians colonized every speck of land in he Pacific. The Japanese Kamikaze attacks stopped because they ran out of planes, not pilots. In the aftermath of the Challenger explosion, of the dozens of astronaut candidates, ONE dropped out.
  You have a very dim view of humanity if you think there would be a problem staffing a starship.
34. Re:Space travel by tompaulco · 2014-03-28 01:10 · Score: 0
  
  Probably the last time anyone here heard about an artificial heart was with the Jarvik 7 back in '82. It might have been considered a failure, though the patient survived for 112 days, he (Barney Clark) asked several times to be allowed to die. Was it a bad idea? Well, there's been plenty of developments in all that time, and it is far from perfected, but I have little doubt that we'll get it right eventually. Or, we could just bury our heads in the sand, and not evolve.
  How is keeping a body alive long past its ability to reproduce or to contribute to society's production considered a positive evolutionary trait?
  
  --
  If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
35. Re:Space travel by lagomorpha2 · 2014-03-28 01:12 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Why would I bring along nine other men???
  To preserve your sanity.
36. Re:Space travel by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 01:13 · Score: 0
  
  We may not have artificial hearts, but implanted heart assist pumps have been in use for a while.
37. Re:Space travel by pr0fessor · 2014-03-28 01:18 · Score: 1
  
  The year is 1987, and NASA launches the last of America's deep space probes. In a freak mishap, Ranger 3 and its pilot, Captain William "Buck" Rogers, are blown out of their trajectory into an orbit which freezes his life support systems, and returns Buck Rogers to Earth, 500 years later.
38. Re:Space travel by Arancaytar · 2014-03-28 01:21 · Score: 1
  
  "... but you're just in time to see us re-terraforming it for the third time."
39. Re:Space travel by jythie · 2014-03-28 01:25 · Score: 1
  
  Finding a large, diverse group of people would not be difficult. Looking at history, there is always a certain percentage of the population who desire getting away from established society and crowded cities. Over the last century we have pretty much run out of places for people to go, there are no new areas left.. thus there is probably a rather significant pent up demand.
40. Re:Space travel by dcw3 · 2014-03-28 01:25 · Score: 1
  
  WOOOOOOSH!
  
  --
  Just another day in Paradise
41. Re:Space travel by jythie · 2014-03-28 01:27 · Score: 1
  
  The key would come down to 'contribute', there is a lot of wiggle room regarding what has larger benefits to society.
42. Re:Space travel by skovnymfe · 2014-03-28 01:31 · Score: 1
  
  Or make the VCR stop saying 12:00?
43. Re:Space travel by dcw3 · 2014-03-28 01:35 · Score: 1
  
  Your opinion of my view of humanity notwithstanding, I'd question the qualifications of those under volunteering for suicide missions (kamikaze), and those departing regions due to persecution. What makes them "qualified"? The rest of your examples all had people who had a potential return ticket to their point of origin. All of the current astronauts knew that they'd likely be returning to Earth, and I would gladly have been a volunteer for a shuttle mission myself, including after Challenger.
  
  --
  Just another day in Paradise
44. Re:Space travel by Joce640k · 2014-03-28 01:38 · Score: 1
  
  Just so. Reduce lifesupport requirements significantly, and a trip to Mars by a 100-man study team becomes (relatively) trivial.
  Apart from reducing their metabolism you'll also have to remove all their bones and replace them with 3D-printed parts when you arrive.
  On the plus side, this reduces the storage space requirements for each human to about 50% of one with bones in it.
  
  --
  No sig today...
45. Re:Space travel by dcw3 · 2014-03-28 01:38 · Score: 1
  
  How is keeping a body alive long past its ability to reproduce or to contribute to society's production considered a positive evolutionary trait?
  You're asking the wrong question. You should be asking how do we evolve science to the point where we can return a body to those points. The evolution of this technology will someday enable that.
  
  --
  Just another day in Paradise
46. Re:Space travel by dave420 · 2014-03-28 01:43 · Score: 1
  
  You just proved two things:
  1. You are ignorant of the medical advances made "over the centuries"
  2. You are so drenched in hubris you don't even realise #1, even though the very fact that you are alive means it's true.
47. Re:Space travel by Ryanrule · 2014-03-28 01:50 · Score: 1
  
  Who are you gonna brag to about your conquests, and drink beer with?
48. Re:Space travel by crakbone · 2014-03-28 01:51 · Score: 1
  
  The times for suspended animation are short (in a scifi sense) but this has happened before and the research is close to 40 years old. Two boys fell into ice a while back and were dead for about an hour to an hour and half. http://www.firehouse.com/forum... As well back in 87 the the was an article about a Beagle that was down for for quite awhile with ice water for blood till they pumped the blood back. From what I understand the big danger is that the brain is sensitive to oxygen when in the suspended state and needs to have oxygen slowly brought back or it caused major damage to the cells. Not quite on the same thread there was a article a while back about a man in Japan that suffered a head injury in the snow and was found a month later and in a self induced hibernation.
49. Re:Space travel by GNious · 2014-03-28 01:51 · Score: 1
  
  50 women, and wide range of donor eggs and sperm
50. Re:Space travel by Glothar · 2014-03-28 02:00 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  What's a VCR?
  ...and why doesn't it support NTP?
51. Re:Space travel by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 02:08 · Score: 0
  
  Alpha Centauri is 4 light-years away. You give a claim of "30,000 years away", which seems to assume a velocity of .00013c.
  That doesn't make sense. Even if we had to wait another century to get up to .0002c, it'll be worth it (getting there in 20,000 years).
  If we had to wait a millenium to get up to .002c, it'll still be worth it (getting there in 2,000 years).
  Which is kind of funny when you think about it. It's very likely that if sleeper ships become common, the earliest launched ships will arrive well after ships launched much later.
52. Re:Space travel by Rhywden · 2014-03-28 02:10 · Score: 1
  
  Not a viable population size due to lack of genetic variety.
53. Re: Space travel by Hal_Porter · 2014-03-28 02:24 · Score: 1
  
  If I was a member of the global elite and I knew civilisation was doomed due to my actions you can bet I'm leaving with my buddies in large, well stocked city sized Super Orion nuclear pulsejet. It's not even about what to do when the ship arrives, more that I want to look out through UV proof windows at the peasants watching the launch through non UV proof glass.
  
  --
  echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
54. Re:Space travel by X0563511 · 2014-03-28 02:25 · Score: 1
  
  We already know the -idea- works - cooling the body down extends the amount of working time on the table.
  It will be interesting if this technique works as they expect. I'd think the hardest part is keeping the blood viable once "replaced" and not causing problems during the swap due to chemistry changes (eg different/reduced energy/waste/oxygen exchange)
  Do the swap fast enough and that's not a problem - but try to do it too quickly and you're going to cause a lot of damage.
  
  --
  For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
55. Re:Space travel by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 02:31 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  I've had sheep, and I've had your wife. I'm sticking with sheep.
56. Re:Space travel by Anubis+IV · 2014-03-28 02:32 · Score: 1
  
  From the article:
  
  "We're trying to save lives, not pack people off to Mars," says Tisherman. "Can we go longer than a few hours with no blood flow? I don't know. Maybe years from now someone will have figured out how to do it, but it will certainly take time."
  The current technique is estimated to buy them an extra two hours or so of time. Enough to take them out of the ER and work on them more thoroughly, but not so much that we could put someone in hibernation.
57. Re:Space travel by CODiNE · 2014-03-28 02:38 · Score: 1
  
  Mein Fuher! I can walk!
  
  --
  Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
58. Re:Space travel by Hamsterdan · 2014-03-28 02:43 · Score: 1
  
  Can you imagine 90 women PMSing at the same time?
  Trust me, getting tossed the airlock will be salvation
  
  --
  I've got better things to do tonight than die.
59. Re:Space travel by interkin3tic · 2014-03-28 03:01 · Score: 1
  
  It is very unlikely that we will be able to use this technology for deep space travel in the near future.
  FTFY. "Ever" is such a long time that making predictions about it are pretty foolish. People saying man will never walk on the moon in the 1600s may have felt safe in making that statement, but they would have been 100% wrong nonetheless.
60. Re:Space travel by Grishnakh · 2014-03-28 03:10 · Score: 1
  
  In the end it will also not matter, because when these people reach the distant location, there will be no compatible civilization on earth left. If any at all.
  Who cares? Why is this important? If it takes you 10000 years to get to some other planet, you're probably not worried about going back to Earth. The point is to start a new civilization elsewhere.
  Third, all that requires energy, which has to be brought with you.
  That's what nuclear power is for. Once a ship is at speed, the ship's systems won't need much power, and that can be provided by nuclear fuel which lasts for thousands of years easily.
  Therefore, the suspended animation must last that long without chemical decay of cellular structure.
  Various animals have been found well-preserved in ice for thousands of years. Properly done, it should be possible to preserve tissue indefinitely with cryogenics. The key of course is the "properly done" part, which we haven't quite figured out. That doesn't mean it's impossible.
  The main problem is, as you state, keeping the ship's technology in working order for that long. That's an engineering problem, and definitely not an insurmountable one. Lots of sci-fi stories have even postulated such missions with automated ships which would revive some humans if they detected a problem, so the humans could repair it and go back to cryonic suspension.
61. Re:Space travel by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 03:13 · Score: 0
  
  Actually since the tech necessary to fertilize an egg with DNA from another egg is about as far along as this stasis system, it's probably more sustainable to ditch the sperm bank and just go full "space amazon".
  That way you don't need to worry about maintaining your gender balance on subsequent generations (since eggs will only contain X chromosomes the children should all be female). You also nicely dodge any risk of uncontrolled population growth as no one can reproduce without medical assistance (with the sperm bank you'll need to occasionally keep a few males to replenish the bank with a bias towards more for genetic diversity).
62. Re:Space travel by Grishnakh · 2014-03-28 03:17 · Score: 1
  
  if sleeper ships become common, the earliest launched ships will arrive well after ships launched much later.
  This meme keeps getting repeated. There were even a bunch of Star Trek episodes that mentioned stuff like this (lost sleeper ships, such as Khan's ship the Botany Bay).
  Why wouldn't sleeper ships have radio beacons, and if later ships developed better propulsion tech, they could catch up to the older ones, update their engines or transfer their crew. Why would you simply leave the older ships out there, knowing they're eventually going to catch up with you at the destination?
63. Re:Space travel by prefec2 · 2014-03-28 03:24 · Score: 1
  
  The scenario for this that we travel with some sub-light vehicle to another start system which will take ten-thousands years. And it is therefore very unlikely that we ever use that technology for an endeavor which will include such time frames. Technology and physics strongly suggest that we are never able to produce technology which lasts for decades without maintenance or even centuries. Therefore, we will never go on such missions. Exception is: We wreck earth completely, but are able at that point to build something which is that sophisticated.
  BTW: Unlikely is not the same as impossible. For the near future (e.g. 5 years) we will not build such device. In my lifetime (e.g. 40 years) we will not build such device. We need some new physics tricks to be able to build such ship (sub light) and we need to be able to create technology which is able to self-repair. As both are not available and actual approaches are in early stages that it will take more than 50 years for them to mature.
64. Re: Space travel by SpaceCracker · 2014-03-28 03:26 · Score: 1
  
  Will they go back to sleep volenterily? It might be so boring to stay awake that they will. OTOH some might abuse their awakened advantage over the others. Hey, we're only human...
  
  --
  sigo ergo sum
65. Re:Space travel by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 03:29 · Score: 0
  
  But how would they know where they are going? If we spot a habitable planet 5000 light years away we're looking at it 5000 years ago, it might not even be there any more let alone by the time the colonists get there.
  Now maybe you say the ship could change course but you're talking about delaying by thousands of years every time a mistake is made and there is nothing habitable when it gets near enough the destination to determine that.
66. Re:Space travel by nospam007 · 2014-03-28 03:30 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  "Why wouldn't sleeper ships have radio beacons, and if later ships developed better propulsion tech, they could catch up to the older ones, update their engines or transfer their crew. Why would you simply leave the older ships out there, knowing they're eventually going to catch up with you at the destination?"
  We can't even find a Boing on Earth who had radio beacons.
67. Re:Space travel by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 03:30 · Score: 0
  
  Almost all medieval books are readable to modern people, and what's even more amazing, most ancient scripts and languages have been deciphered. It doesn't matter that most people cannot read a medieval text. Most people cannot read modern literature either, even if it's in English.
68. Re:Space travel by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 03:30 · Score: 0
  
  Yes, there has never been a problem finding psychopathic, sadistic, megalomaniacal volunteers for dangerous, one-way missions.
  FTFY.
69. Re:Space travel by digsbo · 2014-03-28 03:35 · Score: 1
  
  Sure, but think of the musical theatre!
70. Re:Space travel by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 03:36 · Score: 0
  
  Probably the most practical way to do it will be engineering an artificial body, and then uploading an abstract of your personality into it. I say an abstract, because even with a perfect copy, they will be less and less "you" over time, and probably someone else entirely in 2-10 years.
  Anyway, put those one ice, wake them up 20-20,000 years later, and let them explore. Maybe make 200 copies to start, then have them make copies at each new star system. Unique finding are beamed, or shipped back along the lines of communication/exploration until they reach the parent civilization.
  In less than a million years, Earth's system would likely be a new hub of galactic knowledge. Suitable systems could be seeded, and you could have all sorts of human descended colonies out there. Certainly not "human" in the sense we are ,as each would have to be adapted, but so be it.
71. Re:Space travel by prefec2 · 2014-03-28 03:49 · Score: 1
  
  In the end it will also not matter, because when these people reach the distant location, there will be no compatible civilization on earth left. If any at all.
  Who cares? Why is this important? If it takes you 10000 years to get to some other planet, you're probably not worried about going back to Earth. The point is to start a new civilization elsewhere.
  Normally people want to have some way of staying in contact. They even did when the US was colonized.
  
  Third, all that requires energy, which has to be brought with you.
  That's what nuclear power is for. Once a ship is at speed, the ship's systems won't need much power, and that can be provided by nuclear fuel which lasts for thousands of years easily.
  You need a lot of energy to support lets say 100 000 stasis pods and you want to support those for 30 000 years. Lets assume that on pod requires 200 W per hour. So you need 20 MW/h output for that. Approx. 7 g Uranium is needed for 1kW/h. So you need 140 kg/h (at least if Yahoo is right). 30 000 years are 262.8 Mh. This will result in 36792 kt (kilo ton/Gg giga gram) Uranium. Alone the transfer to earth orbit at present (19 Mio $ ton) makes it impossible to realize financially. Not to mention the proper storage. for all the Uranium. And it decays on the trip making it worthless over time. Maybe with fusion, but this is another technological dream.
  
  Therefore, the suspended animation must last that long without chemical decay of cellular structure.
  Various animals have been found well-preserved in ice for thousands of years. Properly done, it should be possible to preserve tissue indefinitely with cryogenics. The key of course is the "properly done" part, which we haven't quite figured out. That doesn't mean it's impossible.
  Well preserved? they had real trouble isolating intact DNA. But ok, maybe they can put the people in cold storage without cell damage.
  
  The main problem is, as you state, keeping the ship's technology in working order for that long. That's an engineering problem, and definitely not an insurmountable one. Lots of sci-fi stories have even postulated such missions with automated ships which would revive some humans if they detected a problem, so the humans could repair it and go back to cryonic suspension.
  True in sci-fi. In reality we are not able to run factories without hazards. Yes we have monitoring systems, but they are not perfect. And beside repair team you need tools and materials to repair the machinery. Therefore, for every used technology you need all the factory capabilities to produce such parts.
  Sci-fi is good to discuss such long travel issues, however, it is always a simplification on various parts of such an endeavor. Therefore you cannot really assume that, because it is possible in sci-fi, it would be possible in future.
72. Re:Space travel by Glothar · 2014-03-28 03:53 · Score: 1
  
  And in a dozen generations:
  ...forgets what they were even trying to accomplish and just decide to drift in space and live their lives
  ...or sets up a new religion based on the vindictive Banishers who imprisoned them on the ship
  ...or go crazy looking into the vast darkness of space, and turn into bloodthirsty barbarians who seek out other colony ships to kill and eat them
73. Re:Space travel by Grishnakh · 2014-03-28 03:55 · Score: 1
  
  You need a lot of energy to support lets say 100 000 stasis pods and you want to support those for 30 000 years. Lets assume that on pod requires 200 W per hour.
  Why would you need that much power to keep people cold? Have you forgotten that space is close to absolute zero? Just keep the entire stasis pod portion of the ship unheated.
74. Re:Space travel by blue9steel · 2014-03-28 03:55 · Score: 1
  
  We have the scientific knowledge to achieve speeds greater than that. The engineering portion is still being worked on but that's just a matter of time and budget.
75. Re:Space travel by blue9steel · 2014-03-28 04:09 · Score: 1
  
  That gene pool would be way too small. Additionally with that few members in a colony you wouldn't have enough essential skills to maintain a technological civilization. You could mitigate the gene pool size problem by genetically engineering the original colonists and sending them with plenty of additional sperm/ova and some IVF equipment. Unless you have really capable AI/Robots, sufficient to do child rearing to adulthood, I don't think you could raise enough children fast enough to solve the technology issue though. A more appropriate colony size is probably a thousand people. That gives you enough enough diversity of gene pool and skills that even deaths and other accidents would be unlikely to ruin things. This of course assumes that you're essentially cut off, if follow on ships would be arriving on a regular basis you could start with much lower levels.
76. Re:Space travel by Hal_Porter · 2014-03-28 04:15 · Score: 1
  
  Or a bank of frozen ova and sperm. Or DNA sequences stored on a flash drive. Humans have 98% of their DNA in common, so you would only need to store the 2% of diffs. If properly compressed, all the genetic diversity of the entire human population of the earth would probably fit in a few terabytes.
  You could save space if you only brought the DNA common in countries that developed into industrialized democracies too - Western Europe, East Asia and the North America.
  
  --
  echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
77. Re:Space travel by operagost · 2014-03-28 04:21 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Well, why didn't you pick me up on the way, you bastard!
  
  --
  
  Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
78. Re:Space travel by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 04:21 · Score: 0
  
  Or drink all the Martian beer?
79. Re:Space travel by operagost · 2014-03-28 04:27 · Score: 1
  
  Sounds like Piers Anthony's Macroscope... they turned themselves into goo before heading out.
  
  --
  
  Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
80. Re:Space travel by ThurstonMoore · 2014-03-28 04:31 · Score: 2
  
  Really, 100 fucking women? What do you do when the first one wakes up and kills the other 99 because "they're just a bunch of bitches"?
81. Re:Space travel by th1nk · 2014-03-28 04:32 · Score: 1
  
  So you want people who dislike established society to go and establish society?
82. Re:Space travel by hendrikboom · 2014-03-28 04:41 · Score: 1
  
  Not sure they had the word "science fiction" in 1914. Not even sure when "scientifiction" was coined.
83. Re:Space travel by prefec2 · 2014-03-28 04:49 · Score: 1
  
  If you are referring to this model of a warp bubble proposed by Alcubierre http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A... then yes we have such knowledge. However, it requires things we have never seen and which may not exist. And if it would only be an engineering problem, then lets talk again when they have a prototype. From the prototype to a real engine outside the lab it will be approx. 40 years.
84. Re:Space travel by prefec2 · 2014-03-28 04:54 · Score: 1
  
  I assume that the people are not like dead fish in a freezer. There must be monitoring equipment and other tools to support people. Furthermore, while it is cold in space (3 kelvin background radiation), there is no atmosphere so transporting energy away is also a big issue.
  The present proposal in this thread is, that if a problem arises some humans get out of stasis and fix it. During that time the ship must be habitable. Ergo it must be warm. And all the equipment must work in that ship which will benefit from suitable conditions. 200 W is not really that much energy if you think in a monitoring device, controls, communications etc. then you will need much more energy.
85. Re:Space travel by blue9steel · 2014-03-28 04:54 · Score: 1
  
  Actually I was thinking more of laser pumped solar sails.
86. Re:Space travel by Capt.DrumkenBum · 2014-03-28 04:57 · Score: 1
  
  There is a problem with your plan.
  What if two spiders somehow gets on the ship to mars? With no men to kill the spiders, the women would be over run in no time. :)
  
  --
  If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
87. Re:Space travel by MightyYar · 2014-03-28 05:09 · Score: 1
  
  You looked so peaceful, we didn't want to wake you.
  
  --
  W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
88. Re: Space travel by saleenS281 · 2014-03-28 05:10 · Score: 1
  
  You act as if we can't send documentation of all of our knowledge with them. A population of 1000 sufficiently intelligent people can cover everything required. Not to mention at that point we'll almost assuredly have fully functioning robots to help out.
89. Re:Space travel by Grishnakh · 2014-03-28 05:20 · Score: 2
  
  Transporting energy isn't that big an issue; that's what radiators are for. We already use them a lot on spacecraft, satellites, etc. Over a long trip, once the heat is radiated away, you don't have to worry much about it; it's not like all those frozen bodies are going to keep generating lots of heat. Only the monitoring equipment will, and with modern electronics that's extremely low-power.
  The ship doesn't need to be warm to be fixed. We invented spacesuits for a reason.
  200W per person for communications and controls is ridiculous. A modern laptop PC consumes a small fraction of that power even when running at 100% CPU, and you don't need anywhere near that much compute power to do a little environmental monitoring. A small microcontroller could handle it, while consuming a few milliamps of current at most (or microamps, if you take advantage of sleep states and only wake the thing up periodically to check on things and report back to the main computer). You seem to be assuming that they'd use 1970s electronics technology.
90. Re:Space travel by ruir · 2014-03-28 05:23 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, this seems a lot like the script of Pandorum http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P...
91. Re:Space travel by Calydor · 2014-03-28 05:32 · Score: 1
  
  They had Frankenstein and Jules Verne, so they had the concept of science fiction even if it wasn't called that at the time.
  Way to miss the point, too.
  
  --
  -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
92. Re:Space travel by pubwvj · 2014-03-28 05:33 · Score: 1
  
  "In the end it will also not matter, because when these people reach the distant location, there will be no compatible civilization on earth left."
  The point isn't to come back. The point is to go out.
  "There is no point in deep space travel as long as we are not able to go faster than light or at least close to light speed."
  No point that you understand. There is a point for those of us who would like to seed our planet's life and culture out to the stars. Maybe we'll develop faster than light which will over take those ships, or maybe we won't. But if we don't send out seed ships then we won't have and someday when the rock with our name on it hits Earth we'll be wiped out. This is a very big reason for sending out seed ships.
  Personally, I think they should be live ships, not just storage of corpsicles.
93. Re:Space travel by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 05:49 · Score: 0
  
  Since the invention of the printing press, though, English has been remarkably stable, enough so that schoolchildren read Shakespeare, no matter how much they think the Early Modern English is old-timey.
94. Re:Space travel by jellomizer · 2014-03-28 05:51 · Score: 1
  
  Well if we can get speeds up to a fraction of the speed of light, Say 1/2c then we can explore a 10 Light Year Radius of earth, and have findings back in 30 years (20 years to get there 10 years to send a message back)
  Now I would say if we get those types of speeds we should still send robots over and only send people if found habitable.
  
  --
  If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
95. Re:Space travel by Patch86 · 2014-03-28 06:11 · Score: 1
  
  "Travelling fast" is one thing, "travelling fast in such a way as to successfully arrive in orbit of a planet light-years away without missing and getting lost in space" is another, and "travelling fast in such a way as to rendezvous with an impossibly tiny ship halfway into the interstellar void launched centuries ago, slow down enough to dock with it, drastically reconfigure it mid-flight, then speed back up again and still arrive in orbit of a planet light-years away" is still yet a third thing.
  Basically- doing that would be REALLY hard.
96. RE: Space Travel by zildgulf · 2014-03-28 06:16 · Score: 1
  
  "AND there's a call for people to be part of the first group to create an intergalactic colony. You would be in suspended animation while the ship would travel near maximum warp and should reach Andromeda in about 75 years. Would you be interested?"
97. Re: Space Travel by zildgulf · 2014-03-28 06:17 · Score: 1
  
  The BOTANY BAY?!?!?!
98. Re:Space travel by ConceptJunkie · 2014-03-28 06:59 · Score: 1
  
  Why not? Established society has lots of problems. Here's a chance to try it again from scratch. Maybe they'll get it better. Maybe they won't. But maybe _our_ society will get better and maybe it won't. Either way, we have a lot of history to learn from... if we can.
  
  --
  You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
99. Re:Space travel by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 07:09 · Score: 0
  
  Why would I bring along nine other men???
  To preserve your sanity.
  Too right! Imagine every argument you get into having to apologize and say you were wrong!
100. Re:Space travel by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 07:17 · Score: 0
  
  We can't even find a Boing on Earth who had radio beacons.
  Yeah! And we can't even find a jetliner lost at sea, either!
101. Re:Space travel by deadweight · 2014-03-28 07:25 · Score: 1
  
  I vaguely recall a short story where the ships got 1 year faster every year for hundreds of years and all showed up at once generating a giant traffic jam at the other end and a huge bitch fest from the earlier crews that thought they were "getting away from it all".
102. Re:Space travel by deadweight · 2014-03-28 07:27 · Score: 1
  
  Fsk the slow guys. Those things are like 500 years out of warranty anyway.
103. Re:Space travel by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 07:42 · Score: 0
  
  You could save space if you only brought the DNA common in countries that developed into industrialized democracies too - Western Europe, East Asia and the North America.
  Umm, yeah. Sure. After all, eugenics worked out so splendidly the last time it was tried. What could go wrong? And let me guess: your ancestry is some mixture of european and/or east asian? Did I guess right? What's my prize? Why is it that those who advocate eugenics always seem to see themselves as being at the very pinnacle of the evolutionary ladder? Just coincidence, I'm sure. Also, leaving aside the questionable premise of the superiority of european and east asian DNA, you might want to ponder the fact that what is well-adapted for life on earth may be not so well-adapted for life on another planet far, far away.
104. Re:Space travel by SQLGuru · 2014-03-28 07:47 · Score: 1
  
  I thought everyone got 80 virgins......
105. Re:Space travel by micahraleigh · 2014-03-28 07:54 · Score: 1
  
  +1 for random romaji
106. Re:Space travel by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 07:58 · Score: 0
  
  But how would they know where they are going? If we spot a habitable planet 5000 light years away we're looking at it 5000 years ago, it might not even be there any more let alone by the time the colonists get there.
  Now maybe you say the ship could change course but you're talking about delaying by thousands of years every time a mistake is made and there is nothing habitable when it gets near enough the destination to determine that.
  It's called "kinematics". It is the first thing covered in first semester physics. Are you sure you are one of us?
107. Re:Space travel by Sentrion · 2014-03-28 08:22 · Score: 1
  
  True. Happens in convents all the time.
108. Re:Space travel by Zordak · 2014-03-28 08:24 · Score: 1
  
  And in a dozen generations:
  ...forgets what they were even trying to accomplish and just decide to drift in space and live their lives
  ...or sets up a new religion based on the vindictive Banishers who imprisoned them on the ship
  ...or go crazy looking into the vast darkness of space, and turn into bloodthirsty barbarians who seek out other colony ships to kill and eat them
  Yeah, but there could be downsides, too.
  
  --
  
  Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
109. Re:Space travel by An+ominous+Cow+art · 2014-03-28 08:26 · Score: 1
  
  If I remember correctly, this is basically the plot of "Far Centaurus", by van Vogt.
110. Re:Space travel by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 08:30 · Score: 0
  
  Technology and physics strongly suggest that we are never able to produce technology which lasts for decades without maintenance or even centuries.
  Never able? Perhaps you have never heard of the Voyager program? Those probes were launched in the late 1970s. By my reckoning, that's almost four decades.
111. Re:Space travel by Khashishi · 2014-03-28 08:35 · Score: 1
  
  Hmm. We would probably send robots ahead of us to prepare the colony for when we arrived. An all AI crew could travel substantially faster than any human crew could, and would have plenty of time to get things started. But, just imagine...
  By the time the humans arrive, the robots could have developed a vast interstellar empire. They may or may not welcome the human colonists, who are beyond primitive by comparison.
  It could maybe make an interesting short.
112. Re:Space travel by qwak23 · 2014-03-28 08:47 · Score: 1
  
  In my house it's the woman's job to kill the spiders as I run screaming.
113. Re:Space travel by rk · 2014-03-28 08:53 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, we don't know how to get to 300 km/s now.
  Actually we have a pretty good notion how to do 300km/s and even faster, but when we have manned space programs that regularly have to beat the sofa cushions for change to keep afloat, the cost needed to fully develop something like that is so far out of whack with reality that you might as well wish for magic aliens to whisk you away because the odds are about the same.
114. Re:Space travel by Capt.DrumkenBum · 2014-03-28 09:02 · Score: 1
  
  You are a disgrace to all man kind. Your man card is hereby revoked.
  Damn it! The only thing men have over women is the ability to kill spiders!
  
  --
  If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
115. Re:Space travel by qwak23 · 2014-03-28 10:02 · Score: 1
  
  I still retain duties and responsibilities in regards to the execution and disposal of all home invaders with 6 legs or more that are not spiders.
  As that set is larger, I can still maintain the illusion of dominance.
116. Re:Space travel by K.+S.+Kyosuke · 2014-03-28 10:11 · Score: 1
  
  Damn those Centauri!
  
  --
  Ezekiel 23:20
117. Re:Space travel by Sardaukar86 · 2014-03-28 10:15 · Score: 1
  
  At 0.1% of lightspeed, the trip would be closer to 4300 years than 30,000. Yes, we don't know how to get to 300 km/s now.
  Forgive me if I am incorrect but I thought with ion drives and the like we could indeed accelerate to some significant fraction of C over the course of a couple of years?
  Assuming we could construct such a ship in space in the same manner as the ISS, oh, and assuming we can (politically) get multiple fission reactors into space, I was under the impression we largely had the technology we need for interstellar travel. Or perhaps I'm making the usual mistake and failing to separate science from science fiction..?
  
  --
  ..Mullah or Pope, Preacher or Poet, who was it wrote: "Give any one species too much rope and they'll fuck it up"?
118. Re:Space travel by Sardaukar86 · 2014-03-28 10:24 · Score: 1
  
  Mod down for not being able to spell. Grate? Seriously?
  I know I shouldn't feed the trolls but it seems only fair to remind everyone who thinks like this that people make typos too; they're not all spelling mistakes[1].
  [1] Ref: usual example
  
  --
  ..Mullah or Pope, Preacher or Poet, who was it wrote: "Give any one species too much rope and they'll fuck it up"?
119. Re:Space travel by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 10:52 · Score: 0
  
  It is very unlikely that we will ever be able to use this technology for deep space travel. First, the distance that grate that you need thousands of years to get there. Therefore, the suspended animation must last that long without chemical decay of cellular structure. Second, all the technology in the ship must last that long. We have no technology which is usable without maintenance for that long. Therefore, self-repair ability for everything including the ship itself must be part of the mission. This looks very much, like the man who wanted to travel around the world in a straight line from Peter Bichsel. Third, all that requires energy, which has to be brought with you.
  In the end it will also not matter, because when these people reach the distant location, there will be no compatible civilization on earth left. If any at all. 10000 years ago we were sitting in caves. Reading books from medieval time in their original writing is almost impossible to most people today and that is only 500-1000 years. There is no point in deep space travel as long as we are not able to go faster than light or at least close to light speed.
  Your assuming interplanetary travel = interstellar travel. It can take months / years with current (or near future) technology to get to the outer planets in our solar system. This could be very useful for that. It could save resources and reduce the mass necessary to get a maned mission to Jupiter and beyond. For that matter to Mars which currently is still months / a year away. It could also come in handy for emergencies / lifeboat type situations...
120. Re:Space travel by shutdown+-p+now · 2014-03-28 11:27 · Score: 1
  
  It actually does present an interesting ethical dilemma. If there are any "cold sleep" or other similar long term voyage ships in space by the time we get "warp drive", should we invest all resources into sending warp ships to intercept any of those older ones, so that people onboard don't waste any more of their life than is necessary, before doing any kind of exploration or colonization?
121. Re:Space travel by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 12:01 · Score: 0
  
  Don't you mean 1 man and 72 women?
122. Re:Space travel by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 12:39 · Score: 0
  
  How is keeping a body alive long past its ability to reproduce or to contribute to society's production considered a positive evolutionary trait
  If that is your measure of worthiness to live, I think it only fair that we ask you to list your accomplishments for the past year. What have you done to "contribute to society's production"?
123. Re:Space travel by MightyYar · 2014-03-28 14:20 · Score: 1
  
  Another thing to consider - would you necessarily even be able to find them? :)
  
  --
  W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
124. Re:Space travel by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 16:43 · Score: 0
  
  There is no point in deep space travel as long as we are not able to go faster than light or at least close to light speed.
  MYTH! There is no point in returning. Libertarians and/or anarchists/minimalists will go as far as it takes to get away from meddlesome statists. Whether that is deep space or the Oort cloud remains to be seen.
125. Re:Space travel by moneybabylon · 2014-03-28 17:23 · Score: 0
  
  so that's real life then. in modern feminist women-liberated world, 20% of men fuck 95% of the women and the rest play xbox.
126. Re: Space travel by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 17:44 · Score: 0
  
  50 men and 150 women would be better. ;-)
127. Re:Space travel by cyn1c77 · 2014-03-28 17:59 · Score: 1
  
  This sounds more like science fiction than anything else to me. But if it works and the technique becomes viable to handle patient with heavy injurie - and assuming the patients can be kept suspended for long periods of time without creating further damages, I wonder if the technique could be adapted for space travel. It would solve a lot of problems related to long-duration interplanetary travel.
  The idea is not new. I just wonder if this could be the first step in this direction.
  If you RTFA you'd know that they were only slowing down the cell's metabolic reactions by a factor of 10 or so. They aren't stopping the reactions which, under normal conditions, would result in brain damage after 5 minutes. Thus, for deep space travel (say 1 year of time), you'd need to slow the reactions down by a factor of 10^5. Thus, it is unlikely that this technology would be adaptable to meet that need.
  You'd have more luck working out how to freeze the body without tissue damage from water expansion (for example, by replacing the water with a compatible chemical surrogate that did not expand when it froze). At that point, you could deep freeze the body and effectively stop most molecular transport.
128. Re:Space travel by flyneye · 2014-03-29 01:28 · Score: 1
  
  There is plenty of time to become more well thought out during a period of evolution. Perhaps we are hurrying far too quickly as evidenced by the state of slipshod cures and multiplied symptoms of further damage caused by them. In no way will it support your claim of evolution, but, most of this seems to be done in the name of stockholder profit, rather than furtherance of the species. Kind of like money farming using humans as fertilizer.
  What good is this heart that prolongs a life that cannot afford it, that increases the burden of others by spreading the cost to insurance and medical treatment paid for by everyone? Will these ever increasing non-victorious cures and temporary fixes eventually enslave the planet to feed the medical industry? To reward them for ineptitude dressed as progress? Doesnt sound like you thought this out, so much as regurged the crap you ate.
  
  --
  *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
129. Re:Space travel by flyneye · 2014-03-29 01:36 · Score: 1
  
  You just proved two things;
  1. Your definition of medical advances suffers from low self esteem, indicating you may think leeches are still a good idea.
  2. You are so drenched in hero worship of your inept masters youd drink 2.5 oz of their urine , twice daily if they told you research showed it increased circulation to the brain and prevented alopecia. I really dont think you can tell the difference...
  
  --
  *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
130. Re:Space travel by davydagger · 2014-03-29 02:45 · Score: 1
  
  it sounds like science fiction because it was mentioned in science fiction, specificly Count Zero(second book in the neuromancer trillogy) by WIlliam Gibson
  
  ----SPOILER ALERT-----
  
  in the opening of the book, "the dutchman", is put in suspended animation for 3 months, and his mind is implanted in a virtual reality while they fix his body.
131. Re:Space travel by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-29 04:48 · Score: 0
  
  This is the same procedure used for some heart surgeries. Cool down the body and it buys you about an hour to fix the problem.
132. Re:Space travel by megahurts.gr · 2014-03-29 08:20 · Score: 1
  
  "the distance that grate"? fuck you!
  
  --
  This guide is definitive. Reality is frequently inacurate. (from THHGTTG)
133. Re:Space travel by uninformedLuddite · 2014-03-29 11:03 · Score: 1
  
  I don't mind killing the spiders so long as she mows the lawn, washes the car, changes flat tyres, and does the whipper snipping.
  
  --
  The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
134. Re:Space travel by cffrost · 2014-03-29 14:16 · Score: 1
  
  That gives you enough enough diversity [...]
  
  "Enough" is enough.
  
  --
  Thank you, Edward Snowden.
  
  "Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
135. Re:Space travel by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-30 16:51 · Score: 0
  
  A+++ Grate comment; wood mod down again.
136. Re:Space travel by AK+Marc · 2014-03-31 21:39 · Score: 1
  
  ll the VCRs that support NTP are mining Bitcoins.
  
  --
  Learn to love Alaska
137. Re:Space travel by AK+Marc · 2014-04-01 04:19 · Score: 1
  
  Genetic diversity is irrelevant. Genetic diversity is desirable in the wild because climate change or human encroachment could stress the population, and more diversity would increase the probability that some members possess a trait that is favorable to the new circumstances. Humans don't live in the wild. Light-skinned people can survive in equatorial climes because we have invented "sun screen". We wouldn't need genetic diversity to adapt to a foreign clime, but would be able to adapt ourselves through technology. There isn't a clear minimum for preventing undesirable mutations from being concentrated. But that's the only genetic restriction (you wouldn't send one man and one woman, but 50 of each is a broader selection, so long as the group doesn't include families.
  
  The issues you mention about "skills" are unrelated to genetic diversity. As is the mention of needing surplus population for deaths.
  
  --
  Learn to love Alaska
138. Re:Space travel by blue9steel · 2014-04-01 06:03 · Score: 1
  
  Here's a quick quote from the Wikipedia page on Minimum Viable Population " An MVP of 500 to 1,000 has often been given as an average for terrestrial vertebrates when inbreeding or genetic variability is ignored." I read the citation abstracts and that seems relatively straightforward to me. Obviously the number will depend heavily on what sorts of technology we're positing, how many defects are acceptable, how long we want to ensure survival of the colony and what sort of social rules will be imposed. For example, if monogamy were discouraged in favor of polyamory in order to increase the number of genetic combinations then the initial population size could probably be smaller. Similarly genetic screening of the colonists and/or sending additional genetic material could also make a smaller group more feasible.
139. Re:Space travel by AK+Marc · 2014-04-01 09:35 · Score: 1
  
  MVP from Wikipedia is a number selected based on external pressures in a "wild" population. A controlled environment has a lower number. And humans in the wild are still in a controlled envionment, as they control their own environment. Of course, the proof to this would be finding 100 isolated islands and putting groups of 10 50 100 and other numbers on them and seeing if they are growing or shrinking populations 250 years later. But there may be practical issues with that experiemnt.
  
  --
  Learn to love Alaska
140. Re:Space travel by blue9steel · 2014-04-01 11:13 · Score: 1
  
  I doubt a colony on an unexplored planet with indigenous life would really count as being in a "controlled" environment. Now, if we're talking a lifeless ball of rock, then ok sure. *shrug* The exact number is difficult to pin down and there are many different factors. All I'm saying is if you send out ten colony ships to ten different planets with 100 colonists on each ship and don't check in on them again for a century then I think the number of successful colonies would be much lower than 10 and that if you had a larger number of colonists the success rates would go up significantly. (of course the costs would rise as well) It's all pretty hypothetical though, we're unlikely to do anything of that nature any time soon.
141. Re:Space travel by cwsumner · 2014-04-02 03:52 · Score: 1
  
  So you want people who dislike established society to go and establish society?
  That is how the United States and many of the countries in the Americas got started. Not perfect, but it worked.
142. Re:Space travel by cwsumner · 2014-04-02 03:59 · Score: 1
  
  ... People saying man will never walk on the moon in the 1600s may have felt safe in making that statement, but they would have been 100% wrong nonetheless.
  "People saying man will never walk on the moon in the 1960s may have felt safe in making that statement, but they would have been 100% wrong nonetheless."
  Fixed that for you.
  I was there and I heard them say it, repeatedly.
  Also, the was a phrase in very common use: "You could no more do that than fly to the moon!"
  After the moon landing, I never heard that said again.
Old idea. What makes it possible now? by Thanshin · 2014-03-27 21:43 · Score: 1

This idea is very old, so I suppose there was a technical hurdle to overcome. What is the new development that makes this now possible? The product used is cold saline, so it can't be that.
What's the new technique, process, idea?
1. Re:Old idea. What makes it possible now? by geogob · 2014-03-27 21:56 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Sometimes its small details that make a huge difference and allow old ideas to become reality.
  Just think about blood tranfusions. The first attemps to store blood to transfuse it at a later point all failed. A simple stabilisation agent made the procedure possible. I wouldn't expect the New Scientist to produce such details in their publications though.
  It would be interesting to see a paper from a medical journal on this topic.
2. Re:Old idea. What makes it possible now? by Joce640k · 2014-03-27 22:02 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  This idea is very old, so I suppose there was a technical hurdle to overcome.
  Probably the replacing-all-their-blood-with-saline-without-them-dying part.
  
  --
  No sig today...
3. Re:Old idea. What makes it possible now? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-27 23:20 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  It claims it can be done 2 hours after they've died, at that point I think I could replace the corpses blood with marinara sauce without worrying about the health effects.
4. Re:Old idea. What makes it possible now? by guises · 2014-03-27 23:49 · Score: 1
  
  No, it claims that it can't be done two hours after they're dead.
5. Re:Old idea. What makes it possible now? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-27 23:53 · Score: 0
  
  Reading comprehension... fail.
6. Re:Old idea. What makes it possible now? by CrimsonAvenger · 2014-03-27 23:59 · Score: 1
  
  NO, two hours after they're dead, it's pointless - they're dead. They're not going to get better.
  Two hours before they're dead, and they can extend that two hours for an arbitrarily long period.
  
  --
  
  "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
7. Re:Old idea. What makes it possible now? by rmdingler · 2014-03-28 00:49 · Score: 2
  
  Yes. IIRC, blood transfusions were done even before blood typing was fully understood.
  Sometimes it worked, but often the type administered was incompatible, and it took early medical practicioners a bit to sort it out.
  Some dying patients were saved during this research period though, and if that same mindset is applied to this it will undoubtedly contribute some new technology.... if it doesn't get litigated out of existence first.
  
  --
  Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
  Ernest Hemingway
8. Re:Old idea. What makes it possible now? by liamoohay · 2014-03-28 01:14 · Score: 2
  
  Judging by the quotation in the summary, we can presumably infer that someone who has been dead for less than two hours is only mostly dead. Interesting....
9. Re:Old idea. What makes it possible now? by jythie · 2014-03-28 01:32 · Score: 1
  
  One difference at least is that this was being looked into for military use a few years ago, so there is more research and data to start with.
  
  Even when there is no one specific process or technique available, ideas that failed due to implementation rather then theory are worth revisiting now and then since over the decades our whole tech and knowledge base has improved and solutions might be discoverable.
  
  Just look at all the talk around thorium reactors. They failed the first time around, no one built one for 50+ years, and now we are looking at them again since we have learned so much since then across any number of disciplines.
10. Re:Old idea. What makes it possible now? by Big+Hairy+Ian · 2014-03-28 01:33 · Score: 1
  
  Don't know but there was some interesting studies done by Mark Roth using Hydrogen Sulphide http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M...
  
  --
  Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.
11. Re:Old idea. What makes it possible now? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 01:47 · Score: 0
  
  Two hours before they're dead
  Is perhaps not exactly what you wanted to say. There are, uh... ethical problems... involved with such a practice ;)
12. Re:Old idea. What makes it possible now? by guises · 2014-03-28 01:56 · Score: 1
  
  NO, two hours after they're dead, it's pointless - they're dead. They're not going to get better.
  Yes... This is what I said, what are you going on about?
13. Re:Old idea. What makes it possible now? by JMZero · 2014-03-28 02:02 · Score: 1
  
  Two hours before they're dead, you can treat them by telling them not to go out tonight because they're going to get stabbed.
  
  --
  Let's not stir that bag of worms...
14. Re:Old idea. What makes it possible now? by CrimsonAvenger · 2014-03-28 02:08 · Score: 1
  
  Sorry, missed the post you were replying to. I assumed that when you said "can't", you meant "can't", as opposed to "pointless".
  
  --
  
  "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
15. Re:Old idea. What makes it possible now? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 03:36 · Score: 0
  
  But in terms of the current definition, that involves killing them instead of treating their injuries. Where do they get consenting shooting victims from, and how valid is their consent to be killed for an experiment whose outcome nobody can predict?
16. Re:Old idea. What makes it possible now? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 04:01 · Score: 0
  
  I wouldn't expect the New Scientist to produce such details in their publications though.
  Our expectations of journalism are truly low.
17. Re:Old idea. What makes it possible now? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 04:19 · Score: 0
  
  Would be interesting to know what state the brain is in those two hours and how it perceives time.
  Or what kind of signals that occur while it is decomposing later on.
18. Re:Old idea. What makes it possible now? by bugs2squash · 2014-03-28 04:38 · Score: 1
  
  You get it when the join the military or as a part of their parole agreement when they get out of jail.
  
  --
  Nullius in verba
19. Re:Old idea. What makes it possible now? by mrmagos · 2014-03-28 05:45 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, but at that point, why would you bring them back? To blathe?
  
  --
  Never start vast projects with half-vast ideas.
20. Re:Old idea. What makes it possible now? by hypergreatthing · 2014-03-28 08:00 · Score: 1
  
  Or Folgers Crystals.
  It's been tried and tested too.
21. Re:Old idea. What makes it possible now? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 09:49 · Score: 0
  
  I need to stop watching Torchwood during breakfast cause that sounds reasonable.....
22. Re: Old idea. What makes it possible now? by NigelTheFrog · 2014-03-29 04:51 · Score: 1
  
  This whole idea is similar to a relatively routine procedure called deep hypothermic circulatory arrest which is used for surgery on the aortic arch, where it would be impossible to have the heart beating and it would be impractical to cannulate for cardiopulmonary bypass. Those patients are usually cooled to 18 degrees C and 30-45 minutes is usually the max as far as time is concerned. Even then, at least some cognitive deficit is common. So if we're talking hours here, I'm betting they may live, but I wouldn't expect them to be anywhere near their baseline.
Pretty simple in theory by rebelwarlock · 2014-03-27 21:44 · Score: 1

I have to wonder why this hasn't been done sooner. We've known of the benefits of cooling the body before surgery, as outlined in the article. In fact, I'm pretty sure we've been doing it since the 50s. That being the case, why has it taken so long to get to this point?
1. Re:Pretty simple in theory by wonkey_monkey · 2014-03-27 22:17 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Maybe it's a bit trickier to replace every milliliter of blood in your body with cold salty water than to lower someone's body temperature.
  
  --
  systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
2. Re:Pretty simple in theory by stenvar · 2014-03-28 00:34 · Score: 1
  
  You don't have to replace "every milliliter of blood". The primary purpose of infusing cold saline solution is to cool the body rapidly.
3. Re:Pretty simple in theory by wonkey_monkey · 2014-03-28 01:19 · Score: 2
  
  "The technique involves replacing all of a patient's blood with a cold saline solution [...] At this point they will have no blood in their body"
  
  --
  systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
4. Re:Pretty simple in theory by jythie · 2014-03-28 01:34 · Score: 1
  
  It has been tried before, it is an active area of research, and bit by bit they are learning how to do it. Though one of the big problems is how to test it on humans.
5. Re:Pretty simple in theory by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 01:43 · Score: 0
  
  Yes, it "involves" that, but it's not a requirement. You said in response to someone wondering why this hadn't been done earlier:
  
  Maybe it's a bit trickier to replace every milliliter of blood in your body with cold salty water than to lower someone's body temperature.
  There is no "rather than". Lowering the body temperature quickly is the purpose of replacement. Replacing 95% of the blood would be fine too, since the purpose is cooling, not removal of blood. There hasn't been a great advancement in blood replacement, and the technology to do this probably was available already decades ago.
6. Re:Pretty simple in theory by Confusador · 2014-03-28 04:49 · Score: 1
  
  I think you're mistaken about the degree of precision you should expect from a New Scientist article.
7. Re:Pretty simple in theory by wonkey_monkey · 2014-03-28 06:35 · Score: 1
  
  And I think you're mistaken about assuming they must have made an error, since they state it clearly several times. What to do?
  
  --
  systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
8. Re:Pretty simple in theory by sjames · 2014-03-28 10:41 · Score: 1
  
  I believe they meant for practical purposes, not down to the last milliliter. It's not like there are any cannibals that keep kosher.
Wow by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-27 21:44 · Score: 0

keanureeves.jpg
"Victims" by Rik+Sweeney · 2014-03-27 21:46 · Score: 5, Funny

"10 gunshot and stabbing victims will take part in the trials"
Jesus, I can already picture a scientist charging around a shopping mall with a revolver and a switch-blade yelling "For science!"

--
Summation 2
1. Re:"Victims" by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-27 21:54 · Score: 0
  
  Why switch-blade? Regular kitchen knives, the one use the most in murder, isn't scary enough for your fantasy? And, how pressing a button to open a pocket knife make it more likely to be use for murder peoples?
2. Re:"Victims" by TheRaven64 · 2014-03-27 22:02 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Try carrying a kitchen knife in your pocket sometime and pulling it out in such a way that results in your doing more damage to someone else than to yourself. The reason kitchen knives are one of the most common murder weapons is that most murders are crimes of passion in the home and a kitchen knife is readily available in a convenient knife block or draw (corollary: don't insult the cook!). They're a lot less common in situations involving premeditation.
  
  --
  I am TheRaven on Soylent News
3. Re:"Victims" by FatLittleMonkey · 2014-03-27 22:16 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Mohammed K. (2001). On The Effects Of Passenger Aircraft On Steel Frame Buildings. Proceedings on International Terrorism: 223-225. New York.
  
  --
  Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
4. Re:"Victims" by prefec2 · 2014-03-27 22:17 · Score: 1
  
  Yes let it out your racist impulses.
5. Re:"Victims" by wonkey_monkey · 2014-03-27 22:21 · Score: 1
  
  "10 gunshot and stabbing victims will take part in the trials"
  So, what, until then they just have to muster on as best they can? Seems a little harsh.
  
  --
  systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
6. Re:"Victims" by bdeclerc · 2014-03-27 22:24 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  You do realise that "Muslim" is not a race, right?
7. Re:"Victims" by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-27 22:53 · Score: 1
  
  You do realise that 'incorrect statement' and 'racist statement' are different things, and the fact he's making the former does not imply the latter? You devalue work to fight racism by labelling everything under the sun with the term.
8. Re:"Victims" by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-27 23:13 · Score: 0
  
  In the end it was a really stupid thing to say anyway.
9. Re:"Victims" by Guppy06 · 2014-03-27 23:34 · Score: 1
  
  This is America. Finding gunshot victims isn't that hard.
10. Re:"Victims" by DBCubix · 2014-03-27 23:39 · Score: 1
  
  Jesus, I can already picture a scientist charging around a shopping mall with a revolver and a switch-blade yelling "For science!"
  I see you have been to Tucson before.
  
  --
  I called it a mighty Sperm Whale, she called it Finding Nemo.
11. Re:"Victims" by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-27 23:43 · Score: 0
  
  I agree... because Muslim isn't a race. ;)
12. Re:"Victims" by bytesex · 2014-03-27 23:55 · Score: 0
  
  You realize that there is no biologically acceptable definition of 'race', right?
  
  --
  Religion is what happens when nature strikes and groupthink goes wrong.
13. Re:"Victims" by Marginal+Coward · 2014-03-28 00:12 · Score: 1
  
  When somebody approaches you at a mall asking you to sign a consent form for this, just get out - fast!
14. Re:"Victims" by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 00:18 · Score: 0
  
  That too.
15. Re:"Victims" by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 00:18 · Score: 0
  
  This proves otherwise:
  http://www.gizmag.com/dna-facial-mug-shots/31394/
16. Re:"Victims" by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 00:37 · Score: 0
  
  ...looking for volunteers!
17. Re:"Victims" by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 00:43 · Score: 0
  
  https://www.google.com/search?q=Uk+knives+crimes&tbm=isch
  Kitchen knives, among other large fix blade, are still more common it 'outdoors' crimes than sophisticated and expensive automatic pocket knives aka switch-blade.
  Nobody commit premeditate murder with a 400$ auto knife. They use cheap throw away 4$ kitchen knife from wal-mart.
  INB4 cheap China made auto, these break when stabbing butter.
18. Re:"Victims" by gman003 · 2014-03-28 00:45 · Score: 1
  
  Wow, that's sure taking "publish or perish" to new levels.
19. Re:"Victims" by dcw3 · 2014-03-28 00:58 · Score: 0
  
  From Wikipedia:
  Race is a classification system used to categorize humans into large and distinct populations or groups by anatomical, cultural, ethnic, genetic, geographical, historical, linguistic, religious, and/or social affiliation.
  
  --
  Just another day in Paradise
20. Re:"Victims" by stoploss · 2014-03-28 01:10 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  Try carrying a kitchen knife in your pocket sometime and pulling it out in such a way that results in your doing more damage to someone else than to yourself.
  ...if only someone could invent some sort of "wrapper" for the blade that would allow a fixed blade to be carried safely and drawn out when desired without inflicting injury on the user. Maybe they could call it a "knife condom", or maybe a "knife carrier", or maybe they would invent a completely new word for it like "sheath".
  They could even make universal sheaths that support different types of knives, so that the sheath could be used for a knife that wasn't specifically designed for it.
  Oh well.
  You may be correct that kitchen knives are used mostly in crimes of passion, but don't underestimate the violence inherent in criminals. For example, once the UK finished effectively banning firearms, they were saddened to find that criminals switched to knives instead. What was their reaction? Knife control laws. Obviously, once those laws were in place, it made kitchen knives more popular for use in crime, so their natural reaction was to start calling for a ban on kitchen knives.
  Since they are attempting to treat the symptom rather than the cause, I look forward to a future where the UK calls for a succession of such laws: kitchen knife control, steel pipe control, brick control, rock control, and, ultimately, stick control.
21. Re:"Victims" by dcw3 · 2014-03-28 01:11 · Score: 0
  
  Define "biologically acceptable", and who (or what organization) made that determination? It seems to imply that there are no biological differences, which is patently false. Does this mean that it's biologically unacceptable to make a statement such as the one below regarding sickle cell?
  The prevalence of the disease in the United States is approximately 1 in 5,000, mostly affecting Americans of Sub-Saharan African descent, according to the National Institutes of Health.[60] In the United States, about 1 out of 500 African-American children and 1 in every 36,000 Hispanic-American children born will have sickle-cell anaemia
  
  --
  Just another day in Paradise
22. Re:"Victims" by Kielistic · 2014-03-28 01:11 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  There's no hard definition of species either but I assure you that I am not a cabbage. In the world of biological sciences: "close enough to be useful" is sometimes the best you're going to get.
23. Re:"Victims" by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 01:13 · Score: 0
  
  You failed as soon as you chose Wikipedia as your source.
24. Re:"Victims" by tompaulco · 2014-03-28 01:14 · Score: 2
  
  You do realize that if you are blaming all Muslims / Arabs for the things a bunch of Wahabbist extremists did, you probably are racist, right?
  Bigoted maybe, but not racist. An example of a racist would be someone who implies that all Muslims/Arabs are a single race and calls people racists for saying derogatory things about them.
  
  --
  If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
25. Re:"Victims" by tompaulco · 2014-03-28 01:17 · Score: 1
  
  Well, when you get right down to it, with evolution and all, there aren't really any species either, just one generation of an organization halfway between being something and being something else, but that doesn't stop scientists from classifying things.
  
  --
  If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
26. Re:"Victims" by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 01:19 · Score: 0
  
  Why not? Herbert West did it.
27. Re:"Victims" by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 01:32 · Score: 0
  
  You failed as soon as you chose Wikipedia as your source.
  Would you prefer Nature? (Note: linked from the Wikipedia article).
28. Re:"Victims" by dcw3 · 2014-03-28 01:39 · Score: 1
  
  You failed to provide ANY source.
  
  --
  Just another day in Paradise
29. Re:"Victims" by Chrisq · 2014-03-28 01:44 · Score: 1
  
  From Wikipedia: Race is a classification system used to categorize humans into large and distinct populations or groups by anatomical, cultural, ethnic, genetic, geographical, historical, linguistic, religious, and/or social affiliation.
  There are two aims at communication - to pass on an idea or to deceive. The fact is that Muslims use the term racist just to gag any debate or criticism. If the aim is to communicate and you use a word in an unusual or uncommon way then you would say explicitly what you mean. For example if someone booked a hotel and asked for a room suitable for two adults and two kids then if he turned up with two young goats you could reasonably say that he was being deceptive. Similarly if you use "racist" in a way contrary to the law or common usage - you should say straight "religionist". Further more since I have no problem with the many peaceful religions you should just say "he hates Islam".
  Of course you won't say that, because you are not aiming at communication, just silencing comments that make your faith look bad.
30. Re:"Victims" by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 01:55 · Score: 0
  
  In this case, however, it would be "perish and publish," which is only one small step above "perish and don't publish."
31. Re:"Victims" by Quila · 2014-03-28 02:26 · Score: 1
  
  just silencing comments that make your faith look bad. demonstrate where your faith made itself look bad.
32. Re:"Victims" by Anubis+IV · 2014-03-28 02:36 · Score: 1
  
  Better than my first thought: "Geez, haven't they had enough already? What're you making them stand trial for?!"
33. Re:"Victims" by Megol · 2014-03-28 02:38 · Score: 2
  
  The amount of people that think only middle east people can be/are Muslims are frightening. Just look around the web.
  Ditto those that think wearing a turban means one is a Muslim. Cluelessness and ignorance abounds.
  Also how many people realize that most middle east natives belongs to the Semite group? Look at how often the word anti-Semite is used against people that per definition are Semites. Or do a count of how many US elected have called Iranians Arabs?
  Idiots all the way down...
34. Re:"Victims" by Eunuchswear · 2014-03-28 03:13 · Score: 1
  
  You do realise that "race" only exists in the minds of racists, right?
  
  --
  Watch this Heartland Institute video
35. Re:"Victims" by Grishnakh · 2014-03-28 03:34 · Score: 2
  
  What about fist control? You can beat someone to death with your fists. Maybe they should require everyone to have their hands removed, or to be surgically altered so they can't curl their fingers into a fist.
36. Re:"Victims" by HornWumpus · 2014-03-28 03:49 · Score: 1
  
  Graduate students are a dime a dozen. Look to the senior researchers.
  
  --
  John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
37. Re:"Victims" by HornWumpus · 2014-03-28 03:59 · Score: 1
  
  The British upper class would collapse without sticks up their asses. So 'stick control' is right out.
  
  --
  John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
38. Re:"Victims" by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 04:47 · Score: 0
  
  Don't forget newspaper control... if you're at all familiar with milgrim bricks....
39. Re:"Victims" by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 05:19 · Score: 0
  
  Incorrect capitalization, should be:
  Mohammed K. (2001). On the Effects of Passenger Aircraft on Steel Frame Buildings. Proceedings on International Terrorism: 223-225. New York.
40. Re:"Victims" by serviscope_minor · 2014-03-28 05:33 · Score: 0
  
  Obviously, once those laws were in place, it made kitchen knives more popular for use in crime, so their natural reaction was to start calling for a ban on kitchen knives.
  The nice thing about drama is you can always find at least one nutcase on the internet prepared to yell for something even more extreme.
  Basically even the police said basically "lol no" to that.
  
  --
  SJW n. One who posts facts.
41. Re:"Victims" by serviscope_minor · 2014-03-28 05:38 · Score: 1
  
  You do realise that "race" only exists in the minds of racists, right?
  You do realise that you're wrong, right?
  
  --
  SJW n. One who posts facts.
42. Re:"Victims" by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 07:18 · Score: 0
  
  You do realise that "Muslim" is not a race, right?
  And ain't no some such thing as the American Race either, but I'll tell you what.... my blood is as red as any American and I'll be damned if I am going to check off no square next to Gawd damn URapee'n on no racial profiling government form. You ask me once, you ask me a thousand times... I'm the "other" American race!
43. Re:"Victims" by BananaBender · 2014-03-28 20:32 · Score: 1
  
  You made my day!! :)
44. Re:"Victims" by DiEx-15 · 2014-03-29 04:43 · Score: 1
  
  "10 gunshot and stabbing victims will take part in the trials"
  Jesus, I can already picture a scientist charging around a shopping mall with a revolver and a switch-blade yelling "For science!"
  Or Combustible Lemons
45. Re:"Victims" by hawkfish · 2014-03-31 11:13 · Score: 1
  
  What about fist control? You can beat someone to death with your fists. Maybe they should require everyone to have their hands removed, or to be surgically altered so they can't curl their fingers into a fist.
  As a kickboxer, I think I might support this ;-)
  
  --
  You will not drink with us, but you would taste our steel? - Walter Matthau, The Pirates
46. Re:"Victims" by Grishnakh · 2014-03-31 11:22 · Score: 1
  
  No problem, we'll just require everyone to be surgically altered so they can't kick!
47. Re:"Victims" by micahraleigh · 2014-04-02 09:30 · Score: 1
  
  In other words when someone criticizes a group you like it's useful.
  
  Or are you saying that if I choose to not hire a lazy person I am being racist against lazy people?
48. Re:"Victims" by Kielistic · 2014-04-03 01:08 · Score: 1
  
  I'm saying that you can't fight racists by being as wrong as they are. You think you can tell a racist person that there's no such thing as races and they'll just concede?
49. Re:"Victims" by micahraleigh · 2014-04-04 07:01 · Score: 1
  
  Grouping racism in with people who are uncomfortable around muslims is a qualitative thing and therefore a matter of perspective.
  
  Not sure I understand how your question relates. Might just be I didn't take the time to understand it. Apologies if so.
UPMC Presbyterian Hospital in Pittsburgh by Shakrai · 2014-03-27 21:52 · Score: 1

It makes sense that they're doing this in Pittsburgh, as opposed to New York City, Boston, Chicago, or Los Angeles, all jurisdictions with very tough gun control laws, thus precluding the team from having any gunshot victims to test their method on.
Sarcasm aside, it's interesting that they're waiting for gunshot and/or stabbing victims. Wouldn't this technique be applicable to any physical trauma resulting in massive amounts of bleeding that you might need time to repair?

--
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
1. Re:UPMC Presbyterian Hospital in Pittsburgh by DarkOx · 2014-03-27 22:00 · Score: 2
  
  My question is this voluntary? How is exactly does one opt out if they prefer traditional care? Doesn't seem to be like a recent victim of gross trauma, can exactly make an informed decision.
  
  --
  Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
2. Re:UPMC Presbyterian Hospital in Pittsburgh by Chrisq · 2014-03-27 22:00 · Score: 1
  
  It makes sense that they're doing this in Pittsburgh, as opposed to New York City, Boston, Chicago, or Los Angeles, all jurisdictions with very tough gun control laws, thus precluding the team from having any gunshot victims to test their method on.
  Sarcasm aside, it's interesting that they're waiting for gunshot and/or stabbing victims. Wouldn't this technique be applicable to any physical trauma resulting in massive amounts of bleeding that you might need time to repair?
  I assume that they need victims who have injuries where they are unlikely to survive with conventional treatment, but are fixable given time. Things like motor vehicle accidents are more likely to have multiple complications (did he suffer brain damage from the impact or was it due to the freezing?) and so on.
3. Re:UPMC Presbyterian Hospital in Pittsburgh by TimMD909 · 2014-03-27 22:03 · Score: 2
  
  Presby is only a 5 minute drive from places where stabbings and gunshots are common. One of my mom's friends lost her son from a gunshot basically on the doorstep of Presby. There's a handful of other hospitals next door too (Magee, Mercy, Shadyside, etc). Something like this may have saved his life.
4. Re:UPMC Presbyterian Hospital in Pittsburgh by heypete · 2014-03-27 22:07 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  My question is this voluntary? How is exactly does one opt out if they prefer traditional care? Doesn't seem to be like a recent victim of gross trauma, can exactly make an informed decision.
  According to the article at New Scientist:
  
  Getting this technique into hospitals hasn't been easy. Because the trial will happen during a medical emergency, neither the patient nor their family can give consent. The trial can only go ahead because the US Food and Drug Administration considers it to be exempt from informed consent. That's because it will involve people whose injuries are likely to be fatal and there is no alternative treatment. The team had to have discussions with groups in the community and place adverts in newspapers describing the trial. People can opt out online. So far, nobody has.
5. Re:UPMC Presbyterian Hospital in Pittsburgh by Megol · 2014-03-27 22:12 · Score: 1
  
  It makes sense that they're doing this in Pittsburgh, as opposed to New York City, Boston, Chicago, or Los Angeles, all jurisdictions with very tough gun control laws, thus precluding the team from having any gunshot victims to test their method on.
  Sarcasm aside, it's interesting that they're waiting for gunshot and/or stabbing victims. Wouldn't this technique be applicable to any physical trauma resulting in massive amounts of bleeding that you might need time to repair?
  I guess they need patients where traditional care wouldn't be enough - the Hippocratic oath most physicians adhere to have the idea to do no harm. If traditional care is likely to work it should be preferred to this experimental one. That means that the right patients to try this on are the ones that traditionally would be almost certainly die which limits the selection to some specific types of damage, severe gunshot and stabbing wounds seems like a good subset to select.
6. Re:UPMC Presbyterian Hospital in Pittsburgh by Guppy · 2014-03-27 22:14 · Score: 1
  
  My question is this voluntary? How is exactly does one opt out if they prefer traditional care? Doesn't seem to be like a recent victim of gross trauma, can exactly make an informed decision.
  Unfortunately, this is the problem with experimental therapies intended to be used on emergency patients in extremis, where most of which will be unable to give meaningful consent. It's a common issue in severe trauma and stroke trials. While implied consent for standard emergency treatment can be assumed, this does not hold for experimental therapies.
  In such cases, the researchers will most likely ask a surrogate decision maker (the patient's family) for permission -- as you would for any other non-competent patient who needed a medical decision, and who did not leave written directives beforehand. There will also be an ethics board monitoring the whole thing (as with all human trials, but these types of trials more closely than most).
7. Re:UPMC Presbyterian Hospital in Pittsburgh by deadweight · 2014-03-27 23:32 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  I may get an informed consent form tattooed on my chest. "Dear Mr/Mrs Doctor Person, If I am pretty much dead, feel free to try your experimental zombie procedures. Signed Iwill EatYourBrain
8. Re:UPMC Presbyterian Hospital in Pittsburgh by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 00:46 · Score: 0
  
  I would opt out, I rather die then see the huge medical bills for this type of treatment.
9. Re:UPMC Presbyterian Hospital in Pittsburgh by tompaulco · 2014-03-28 01:18 · Score: 1
  
  This is quite clearly something that should be an opt-in, not an opt-out. Actually I can't think of anything that should be opt-out.
  
  --
  If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
10. Re:UPMC Presbyterian Hospital in Pittsburgh by dcw3 · 2014-03-28 01:23 · Score: 1
  
  Is informed consent required if it's believed that the patient would otherwise die? In other words, this is only utilized as a last resort.
  
  --
  Just another day in Paradise
11. Re:UPMC Presbyterian Hospital in Pittsburgh by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 02:18 · Score: 0
  
  When did you opt-in for conventional treatment?
12. Re:UPMC Presbyterian Hospital in Pittsburgh by Rhywden · 2014-03-28 02:25 · Score: 2
  
  Yeees, because if you're bleeding to death and are probably unconscious to boot, you're in such a great position to make a rational and informed decision.
  It's the nature of this particular beast that there's NO WAY of giving consent.
13. Re:UPMC Presbyterian Hospital in Pittsburgh by multisync · 2014-03-28 02:32 · Score: 1
  
  I rather die then see the huge medical bills for this type of treatment
  I think you would need to do things the other way around. Once you're dead, you would not then be able to see the medical bills.
  
  --
  I don't care why you're posting AC
14. Re:UPMC Presbyterian Hospital in Pittsburgh by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 03:39 · Score: 0
  
  How generous that I can opt out of being killed for science. Sometimes I'm really happy not to live in the US.
15. Re:UPMC Presbyterian Hospital in Pittsburgh by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 03:43 · Score: 0
  
  Post mortem removal of organs for transplantation should definitely be opt-out. If you want somebody else to die just because of your superstitions, you should be required to state that explicitly.
16. Re:UPMC Presbyterian Hospital in Pittsburgh by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 03:45 · Score: 0
  
  The article implies that this procedure will be used in cases where the existing procedure is "give up because they're too far gone to save".
  Since in practice people don't usually stick to their "I'd rather die that endure complex medical procedures" claims when faced with the actual choice, it probably safe to assume that most people would consent given the option.
  Also medical ethics has a very different view of consent that the rest of ethics. For example in lifeguard training they tell you that if the patient is unconscious you have implied consent to give them any first aid you're trained for including CPR which involves braking ribs if you do it right with a pretty terrible chance of actually resuscitating the patient (normally you have to ask permission before you so much as hand out a bandaid). That's essentially the exact opposite of how unconsciousness if treated in any other consent related context.
17. Re:UPMC Presbyterian Hospital in Pittsburgh by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 08:57 · Score: 0
  
  How generous that I can opt out of being killed for science. Sometimes I'm really happy not to live in the US.
  "Killed for science"? Your objection is a bit over wrought. The scenario envisioned is that the patient will certainly die unless this new procedure is used. So your choices are, (1) do nothing and certainly die; or (2) try this new procedure and maybe (if you are lucky) you survive another day. Of course, if you are conscious and able to give consent then I am sure that they would ask for it. Clearer now?
18. Re:UPMC Presbyterian Hospital in Pittsburgh by Sentrion · 2014-03-28 09:01 · Score: 1
  
  It's better when you're dead. They (hospital, physicians groups, etc.) can charge even more, claim that you consented to treatment, and when you're dead your testimony isn't available and there is more to keep your family preoccupied rather than focused on fighting fraudulent bills. Given that insurance companies reimburse at notoriously low amounts, the incentive has never been greater for medical providers to try to find families with enough assets to go after with treatments that insurance won't cover, especially experimental procedures, as well as utilizing out-of-network services in sneaky ways (such as a "facility" that is physically inside the doctor's office but not "in-network", or staff, such as an out-of-network nurse-practitioner, an out-of-network phlebotomist to draw your blood, or anesthesiologist that you never meet).
19. Re:UPMC Presbyterian Hospital in Pittsburgh by Sentrion · 2014-03-28 09:07 · Score: 1
  
  Which makes it such a great business! Customers that never say "no", regardless of how large the bill will be. So the bill just keeps getting bigger even if there is just a slight chance of settling for only a fraction of the amount. Since credit scores are more important than ever, and there is no REAL bankruptcy, most patients will pay whatever money they can scrounge up or borrow from family. Every now and then a wealthy person falls through the cracks with a lapse in insurance coverage or his injuries keep him unconscious for more than the 24 hours that hospitals have to accept insurance at in-network rates. Cha-ching! Jackpot!
20. Re:UPMC Presbyterian Hospital in Pittsburgh by Sentrion · 2014-03-28 09:16 · Score: 1
  
  Given that the cost to remove organs or extend life support to make organ donation possible has been billed to the families of the deceased, I think matters such as organ donation need to remain opt-in. If physicians can sell your heart for $200k, why can't the decedent's estate receive a 2% or 3% commission? If we have chosen to keep a capitalist (not to be confused with "free market") healthcare system, why not let patients choose who to sell their organs to and for how much. I can take out a life insurance policy and use it as collateral for a loan. That is, I can chose for someone else to profit on the event of my death. Why can't I chose to profit from the potential sale of skin grafts or corneas or research use of my body? As for donation, I have had a very private discussion with my immediate family. No doctor or hospital is going to make organ-use decisions while my life is hanging in the balance, no matter how perfect my heart will be for the hospital trustee's wife, who's been on an organ waiting list for over a year. I've seen too much of the dark side of human nature to trust any doctor, scientist, politician or business person to do the "right" thing.
21. Re:UPMC Presbyterian Hospital in Pittsburgh by Sentrion · 2014-03-28 09:51 · Score: 1
  
  It will be utilized if the patient does not refuse treatment. Being unconscious is implied consent. Having a knife or gun-shot wound and consenting to treatment is all that is needed. Insurance doesn't cover experimental procedures, so if you consent you will probably be billed the balance, which would surely leave you bankrupt if you don't have $750k lying around. Of course, bankruptcy was "reformed" in 2005, so it won't really help you much unless you are willing and able to live on the edge of poverty for five years while you pay off as much of the debt as you can.
  Courts have ruled that if you don't pay for the services provided under implied consent (ie. unconscious) then that would be tantamount to unjust enrichment if those services were necessary to protect life or limb. Which means the hospital will sue you, you will lose, and they will take everything you've got.
22. Re:UPMC Presbyterian Hospital in Pittsburgh by Sentrion · 2014-03-28 09:53 · Score: 1
  
  And when obtaining the urgent permission from the family member they probably won't bother to mention that insurance will leave them high and dry and the hospital will go after every red penny they've got.
23. Re:UPMC Presbyterian Hospital in Pittsburgh by sjames · 2014-03-28 10:47 · Score: 1
  
  I suppose other forms of trauma are likely to either produce widespread damage or to be non-fatal. Gunshots and stabbings tend to produce fatal but well contained damage, giving a better chance to surgically repair it if there was enough time.
  As for the first part, they should just request a ride-along with the police. Ca or Fla, their choice.
24. Re:UPMC Presbyterian Hospital in Pittsburgh by tompaulco · 2014-03-29 02:26 · Score: 1
  
  Just like being an organ donor, you agree to it before it becomes an issue.
  
  --
  If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
25. Re:UPMC Presbyterian Hospital in Pittsburgh by Rhywden · 2014-03-29 08:09 · Score: 1
  
  First of all, the situations wherein you are eligible to become an organ donor are usually not as time critical as for this procedure. I mean, in most cases there is time to actually ask the relatives or search for the organ donor card.
  The cases in question? They're a matter of mere minutes.
  Secondly, you're asking for a multi-million dollar campaign. The fun part with this? Your companions (one who also replied to my first post on this topic) complain about medicine being too expensive. Well, sure, if you have to cover every angle in your moron lawyer-sharkfest society, then you can bet your ass that it's expensive.
Too bad they won't use glycoproteins by wisebabo · 2014-03-27 22:03 · Score: 3, Interesting

The real(?) key to long-term suspended animation (months, years) would probably involve cooling the body to sub-freezing temperatures.
At that point, you need something to keep the ice-crystals from rupturing cells. In certain antarctic fish they have glycoproteins that do this (I think other hibernating animals use glycol or glycogen).
Until we get nuclear fusion(?) it's clear that spaceflight even just within our solar system is going to require some pretty lengthy journeys. On the other hand, if safe long-term suspended animation is attained, there might be a whole bunch of "future" travelers who might decide to jump (one way of course) years, decades, centuries into the future.
I think there was a science fiction book which talked about the (disastrous) effects such a technology had on society.
1. Re:Too bad they won't use glycoproteins by geogob · 2014-03-27 22:16 · Score: 1
  
  How do you believe that nuclear fusion would improve the speed of travel through the solar system?
2. Re:Too bad they won't use glycoproteins by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2014-03-27 22:35 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Radically better thrust/weight ratios than chemical fuels? Potentially better behaved than 'Project Orion' style nuclear propulsion?
  
  Be that as it may, I'm pretty sure that no sane IRB would sign off on using cryonics and experimental nonhuman proteins on gunshot victims just because Space is Awesome, man! The scope of the study is techniques to provide team trauma surgeon more time to stitch them back up before they bleed out, a short timeframe, and likely one where working on frozen tissue would not make matters easier.
3. Re:Too bad they won't use glycoproteins by jabuzz · 2014-03-27 22:37 · Score: 1
  
  Lots of interesting propulsion systems become viable that make current rocket technology look the equivalent of a horse and cart to a modern motor vehicle.
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P...
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F...
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P...
4. Re:Too bad they won't use glycoproteins by Electricity+Likes+Me · 2014-03-27 23:15 · Score: 2
  
  It's not "frozen" - it's cold. The whole point of the technique is to minimize ice-crystal formation, which is what does a lot of the damage.
5. Re:Too bad they won't use glycoproteins by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2014-03-27 23:32 · Score: 1
  
  'Frozen' was referring to the grandparent post's expression of disappointment that they aren't using glycoproteins and sub-freezing temperatures. My point was that ethically doing those experiments, or even getting IRB approval for those experiments, on this patient population would (and should) be essentially impossible.
  
  This study aims to improve outcomes for severe tissue damage. The grandparent poster wanted research into long-term hibernation. Aside from long-term work simply being riskier and more speculative, it is likely that at least some of what works best there is directly contrary to what works best for short term treatment of tissue damage.
6. Re:Too bad they won't use glycoproteins by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-27 23:55 · Score: 0
  
  It's probably worth mentioning that 'Project Orion' style nuclear propulsion can use fusion bombs and they are faster than fission-only designs.
7. Re:Too bad they won't use glycoproteins by CrimsonAvenger · 2014-03-28 00:05 · Score: 2
  
  Radically better thrust/weight ratios than chemical fuels? Potentially better behaved than 'Project Orion' style nuclear propulsion?
  Thrust/weight ratios are pretty much meaningless for interplanetary travel. What you are no doubt thinking of is "Specific Impulse", which should be radically greater with fusion (or gaseous fission) drives.
  As far as Orion goes, it's likely that the first nuclear spacecraft (whether fission or fusion) will be some variation on the Orion concept - laser fusion will likely be the easiest way to develop a fusion drive, and laser fusion is just Orion with tiny bombs....
  
  --
  
  "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
8. Re:Too bad they won't use glycoproteins by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 00:44 · Score: 0
  
  One Word: NERVA
  Probably canceled to prevent Congress from having to vote on a bill to send people to mars or at least build a moon colony.
9. Re:Too bad they won't use glycoproteins by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 00:51 · Score: 0
  
  I think there was a science fiction book which talked about the (disastrous) effects such a technology had on society.
  can anybody identify this book? I'd like to read it
10. Re:Too bad they won't use glycoproteins by Electricity+Likes+Me · 2014-03-28 02:45 · Score: 1
  
  True. Although in terms of long term hibernation, I suspect getting permits for that type of research would be easy - we already have a euthanasia movement principally concerned with people who are in chronic pain from terminal illnesses, in some cases at a fairly young age.
  I suspect any of them would be very happy to take a long shot gamble on long-term hibernation until their condition could be cured. The issue is, scientifically there's little evidence we can yet do that.
11. Re: Too bad they won't use glycoproteins by wisebabo · 2014-03-28 03:41 · Score: 1
  
  I think it might be one of Orson Scott Card's books, either "Capitol" or something related to his "Worthing" saga. I did a (very) quick google search and found this review:
  "enjoyed this series of short stories dealing with Capitol, and the drug Somec, which is given only to Capitol's elites, and allows them to extend their normal life spans over hundreds of years by sleeping a good part of the time. How Somec was developed, how Capitol was constructed, the used and abuses of the immortality drug in a strange society, are described in these interconnecting glimpses into fascinating characters. "The Worthing Saga" is the novel connected to these ideas, but I preferred the format of this book, rather than the drawn out plot of the novel. "
12. Re:Too bad they won't use glycoproteins by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 03:42 · Score: 0
  
  The science fiction that you are thinking of (probably) is written by Orson Scott Card. In the Trantor-esque high society capital world of Capitol, the rich and important use the drug somec to be placed in suspended animation at increasing ratios of sleep/awake as a reward for their contributions to society. This allows them to survive for much greater than the standard human lifespan, as they do not age while under the influence of the drug.
  The myriad of long term social and societal effects of this practice (the majority of them deleterious) are examined at length by Card, as many of his short stories are set on his world of Capitol. They are all collected in The Worthing Saga, a good read even if you aren't a fan of his more popular works such as Ender's Game (I'm not).
13. Re:Too bad they won't use glycoproteins by HornWumpus · 2014-03-28 04:08 · Score: 1
  
  I'm sure there are more then one: 'Do Android Dream of Electric Sheep' is set on such an earth. It's overpopulated, but the society is stagnant in large part because everybody with ambition has left. Those who remain are weirdly obsessed with artificial pets and keeping up with their neighbors. Didn't make it into 'Bladerunner'.
  
  --
  John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
14. Re:Too bad they won't use glycoproteins by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 04:56 · Score: 0
  
  Radically better thrust/weight ratios than chemical fuels?
  When it comes to interplanetary flight, it's not the thrust/weight ratio that matters. It doesn't matter if your engine weighs a tonne and produces a gram of thrust - that just means you have to run it for longer. What counts is the impulse/weight ratio (the same thing as the rocket exhaust velocity), which determines how much you can change your velocity with a given amount of fuel.
  Chemical engines have great thrust/weight ratio (important for taking off from a planet!), but poor exhaust velocity. Nuclear (fission) engines have worse thrust/weight, but better exhaust velocity. Fusion engines would go a bit further in both respects. And ion engines go further still: their thrust/weight ratios are absolutely terrible, but their exhaust velocity is better than even fusion engines could achieve.
15. Re:Too bad they won't use glycoproteins by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 05:53 · Score: 0
  
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
  "Twenty-First Century Medicine has vitrified a rabbit kidney to -135ÂC with their proprietary vitrification cocktail. Upon rewarming, the kidney was successfully transplanted into a rabbit, with complete functionality and viability, able to sustain the rabbit indefinitely as the sole functioning kidney."
16. Re:Too bad they won't use glycoproteins by quarterbuck · 2014-03-28 08:42 · Score: 1
  
  At that point, you need something to keep the ice-crystals from rupturing cells. In certain antarctic fish they have glycoproteins that do this
  That is the point of salt water. It won't freeze at 0 celsius and is a lot safer than antifreeze to the cell material.
  
  --
  http://slashdot.org/submission/1062723/Cheap-mobile-data-plan?art_pos=2
Science fiction by wonkey_monkey · 2014-03-27 22:18 · Score: 1

"We are suspending life, but we don't like to call it suspended animation because it sounds like science fiction," says Samuel Tisherman, a surgeon at the hospital, who is leading the trial. "So we call it emergency preservation and resuscitation."
Are they nuts? That's exactly why they should call it suspended animation! It's awesome!

--
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
1. Re:Science fiction by deadweight · 2014-03-27 23:39 · Score: 1
  
  I can't count the number of sci-fi books where a badly injured person is put in suspension until they reach a hospital that can deal with their injuries. This really will be life imating art. In other news, Haitian witch doctors can do something similar. Real life "zombies" are not dead, but they THINK they were. Might want to look into that as well. If memory serves, puffer fish poison was the main part of their zombie drug.
2. Re:Science fiction by wonkey_monkey · 2014-03-28 01:21 · Score: 1
  
  Haitian witch doctors can do something similar. Real life "zombies" are not dead, but they THINK they were. Might want to look into that as well. If memory serves, puffer fish poison was the main part of their zombie drug.
  Yeess... can't say I've read any studies of the efficacy of real-life zombification on gunshot survival rates.
  
  --
  systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
3. Re:Science fiction by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 03:55 · Score: 0
  
  The puffer-fish-zombie thing is basicly anesthesia. They drug you into an induced coma which looks superficially indistinguishable form death, and dig you up after the funeral so you get the whole "extracted from the ground and awoken to the ministrations of a witch-doctor" experience.
  The same concept is used in modern medicine to grate effect, but it has it's limits as (for example) you can still bleed to death while in an induced coma.
4. Re:Science fiction by deadweight · 2014-03-28 07:20 · Score: 1
  
  So there is a risk of turning into a grate? OMFG! As a side note, I bet the zombie medicine only really works well on Haitians. I suspect the average American, far from thinking they were a reanimated corpse under the control of a voodoo priest, would be running around looking for a lawyer within minutes of zombie-reanimation.
Well, Calrissian, did he survive? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2014-03-27 22:26 · Score: 1

"Yes, he's alive, and in perfect hibernation."
1. Re:Well, Calrissian, did he survive? by OzPeter · 2014-03-27 23:05 · Score: 1
  
  "Yes, he's alive, and in perfect hibernation."
  Can't say the same thing about Lando's dance moves though. That first number with the dancing stormtroopers and the supporting Ewoks was painful to watch. Though I'll give him props for trying it at his age and with the physical issues he has.
  
  --
  I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
old news by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-27 22:39 · Score: 0

This has already been covered days ago, everywhere else. If I wanted old news, I'd subscribe to a newspaper.
1. Re:old news by AdamColley · 2014-03-27 23:05 · Score: 1
  
  You're new here, aren't you.
2. Re: old news by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 00:34 · Score: 0
  
  Not everyone is as quick as you.
3. Re: old news by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 02:27 · Score: 0
  
  Curiously, that's what she said.
Sounds like a horror film plot by erroneus · 2014-03-27 22:43 · Score: 3, Insightful

I seem to recall some horror film plots something like that. Usually it's something along the lines of zombies, but I also seem to recall something along the lines of preserving the lives of those who are supposed to be dead and something bad happening as a result. Combine the two? Uh boy... they are supposed to be dead and when "brought back" are actually spirited by demons or something like that.
I am extremely wary yet curious about the technique. To take a body and remove the blood and store it? I'm okay with doing that to a person officially declared dead especially if it's (1) approved by the living person in advance (2) someone extremely recently dead.
What is it about blood which causes problems which are solved by removing it? What's more, with all that capilary action, how can they be sure they removed it all?
1. Re:Sounds like a horror film plot by Livius · 2014-03-27 23:16 · Score: 1
  
  I think the point about replacing blood is just to get the refrigerant to all parts of the body quickly. But if there was any temporary oxygen deprivation, there could be brain damage and then you've got zombies.
2. Re:Sounds like a horror film plot by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-27 23:27 · Score: 1
  
  It's not the lack of blood that's the trick, it's just using the circulatory system to pump cold saline to rapidly (and evenly?) reduce the body temperature. This is similar to the stories about people falling through the ice who are submerged for extended periods but survive because hypothermia slowed down their metabolism enough to slow the damage.
3. Re:Sounds like a horror film plot by wjcofkc · 2014-03-27 23:54 · Score: 2
  
  What is it about blood which causes problems which are solved by removing it?
  10 C or 50 F is pretty cold for blood. I would imagine it would difficult to maintain pressure that that temperature. Cooling the blood to that level may also damage cells, regardless of the fact that it's not freezing - that's me speculating. I would also venture to guess that its faster to cool the body with readily available cold saline then run the blood through a cooling machine. Also, under the conditions they are testing the technique, the patient has already lost most of their blood. Doctors already use blood cooling machines for certain types of heart surgery, but in that situation, they have time. With this technique, time is of the essence.
  
  especially if it's (1) approved by the living person in advance
  From the article:
  
  "The trial can only go ahead because the US Food and Drug Administration considers it to be exempt from informed consent. That's because it will involve people whose injuries are likely to be fatal and there is no alternative treatment. The team had to have discussions with groups in the community and place adverts in newspapers describing the trial. People can opt out online. So far, nobody has."
  
  I am extremely wary yet curious about the technique.
  Why are you wary? The technique has already passed animal trials and these people are going to die anyway. At the beginning of your comment you mention a concern that people will come back with demon souls or something similar that you have "learned" from watching horror films. At first I thought you were being facetious - are you actually concerned about that?
  
  You should try reading the article, it's rather enlightening.
  
  --
  Brought to you by Carl's Junior.
4. Re:Sounds like a horror film plot by FilmedInNoir · 2014-03-28 00:58 · Score: 1
  
  Or a super villain/hero origin story.
  
  --
  Sig. Sig. Sputnik
5. Re:Sounds like a horror film plot by meta-monkey · 2014-03-28 03:52 · Score: 1
  
  The only problem I see is "the fate worse than death." What if it works, saves your life, but now you're cripplingly brain damaged? They might save your life, but you might wish they hadn't...
  
  --
  We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
6. Re:Sounds like a horror film plot by wjcofkc · 2014-03-28 04:13 · Score: 1
  
  In the animal studies, there was no evidence of brain damage after the procedure - and they have been experimenting for a decade to be sure. Animal studies, especially on pigs (very close human relatives) are generally very accurate and telling. As for actual humans? We will have to wait and see, but ultimately human trials are a must. If they manage to save the lives of these first few, without incident directly related to the procedure, it will be one of the biggest breakthroughs in medicine in a very long time, and may eventually contribute to actual long-term suspended animation\stasis technology. The benefit there is that we will be able to take people who have incurable diseases, are nearing death, and put them into a long-term cold sleep until their disease can be cured. The article discusses how the low temperature protects cells from damage. Unfortunately, they left out that at those temperatures the brain goes in to a hibernation state to protect itself. It is likely that this will work out.
  
  --
  Brought to you by Carl's Junior.
7. Re:Sounds like a horror film plot by erroneus · 2014-03-28 07:18 · Score: 1
  
  I was facetious about the horror-story side of things, however, to me the fate worse than death is a life-long disability.
8. Re:Sounds like a horror film plot by erroneus · 2014-03-28 07:21 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, I read that. But one of the main things about human animals is that we are "all about the brain." Our bodies are geared specifically for big brain development and maintaining that big brain. So what might not appear as damage to pigs (which are pretty close to humans in terms of brain configuration as well as taste... go ahead, ask me how I know) might actually appear in humans simply because we have no tests for pigs. Another pig might know but would have no way to tell us humans.
9. Re:Sounds like a horror film plot by erroneus · 2014-03-28 07:22 · Score: 1
  
  Okay, you just sold me. I would be okay with becoming a super villain or super hero. I can't tell you how many times I've watched a news story of some form or brutality and wanted to be some invincible being who could teach those jerk-holes a lesson.
10. Re:Sounds like a horror film plot by geogob · 2014-03-28 08:34 · Score: 1
  
  I seem to recall some horror film plots something like that.
  You could say this about a lot of surgical and medical procedures.
11. Re:Sounds like a horror film plot by erroneus · 2014-03-29 02:35 · Score: 1
  
  I can't believe no one nibbled at that one. If you like documentaries, search one called "Eating with Cannibals." Fascinating. National Geographic.
If it were 1/4/2014... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-27 23:15 · Score: 0

I almost suspect this could be an April Fool's joke just for the name of the surgeon.
How perfect is it that his name is Peter Rheeat? :D
Hydrogen Sulfide by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-27 23:28 · Score: 0

The article didn't mention this, but I would bet that they're also using hydrogen sulfide to help maintain that state of suspended animation.
I had something similar done about 10 years ago by joseph90 · 2014-03-27 23:48 · Score: 5, Interesting

I had something similar done about 10 years ago. It was a bit experimental at the time and they told me I was very probably going to die during surgery and if I did not die I would prob. have brain damage and/or organ failure but without the surgery I would be dead in hours. They cooled down my body and then removed all my blood, there was no saline replacement. I was dead for about 10 minutes and apart from some problems reanimating me it worked out OK (there were some problems,I spent a month afterwards in a medically induced coma and had to have further work done repairing some damage caused during surgery). It was considered a major success at the time.
A bit scary to be told that you have about 30 minutes to live. Last thing I remember is the anesthetist putting a line in and thinking that once he injected the anesthetic I was going to die.
1. Re:I had something similar done about 10 years ago by ThatsDrDangerToYou · 2014-03-28 01:41 · Score: 1
  
  Mod fascinating. Curious what your condition was, but of course that's your bidniss. So basically you went out and then the "next thing" was you were waking up?
2. Re:I had something similar done about 10 years ago by schneidafunk · 2014-03-28 02:44 · Score: 1
  
  What was the replacement? Donor blood?
  
  --
  Some people die at 25 and aren't buried until 75. -Benjamin Franklin
3. Re:I had something similar done about 10 years ago by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 03:45 · Score: 0
  
  WTF happened to cause that?
  Captcha: oblivion
4. Re:I had something similar done about 10 years ago by meta-monkey · 2014-03-28 03:54 · Score: 1
  
  What was it like waking up a month later? Did you remember anything? Did you dream, or was it instantaneous for you?
  Your story sounds both awesome and terrifying. Awesifying, even.
  
  --
  We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
5. Re:I had something similar done about 10 years ago by joseph90 · 2014-03-28 04:28 · Score: 2
  
  No donor blood, old stuff put back in after operation and then heart restarted.
  Some internal changes and upgrades were made.
6. Re:I had something similar done about 10 years ago by joseph90 · 2014-03-28 04:34 · Score: 1
  
  Not quite.
  I was unconscious for about three weeks (maybe more), still not sure how long, never checked the dates.
  I would occasionally be "self aware" (but unable to sense anything external) I presume when they were changing medication or trying out different stuff to see if I could be woken but then I would kinda disappear again. Had a few intense dreams not sure how long they lasted or what order they occurred in. They were mostly unpleasant, I presume my brain was trying to make sense of what was happening to my body. Then I woke up but still heavily drugged and hallucinating (still unpleasant)
7. Re:I had something similar done about 10 years ago by joseph90 · 2014-03-28 04:45 · Score: 2
  
  I remember lots but most of it never happened. Impossible to tell the real from the imaginary. Lots of (really) intense dreams that were very unpleasant. However those would almost certainly have happened afterwards while I was unconscious not while I was on the operating table. They say that after a week in ICU you go a bit insane. "ICU psychosis" is what it is called. Hallucinations were very common, I could not tell the difference between when I was dreaming and when I was awake.
  A bit like nightmare on elm street.
  Could have been worse the guy next to me and the one across from me died (painfully)
8. Re:I had something similar done about 10 years ago by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 09:48 · Score: 0
  
  Was this a motorcycle accident or something?
No method of fixation is without it's artifacts. by voodoo+cheesecake · 2014-03-27 23:49 · Score: 1

The fly is in the ointment.
Since when do we have to opt out to avoid being... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-27 23:56 · Score: 0

experimented on?
This sort of sounds like we have to opt out to avoid being "experimented" on.
April Fool's day : new date in march ? by advid.net · 2014-03-28 00:07 · Score: 2

Is it April Fool's day right now on /. ?
Leader's haircut, suspended life, ... what's next ?
1. Re:April Fool's day : new date in march ? by Marginal+Coward · 2014-03-28 00:43 · Score: 2
  
  Facebook Purchases Minecraft for $3 Billion
  AP - Social networking giant Facebook announced plans Thursday to buy the popular multiplayer game Minecraft from its creator, Markus "Notch" Persson, for $3 Billion, its latest in a series of high-profile acquisitions. Persson will receive compensation in the form of cash, stock, and an undisclosed number of Oculus Rift headsets.
  Asked why he is selling Minecraft to Facebook following his statements that he would cease development of Minecraft for Oculus Rift when Facebook's purchase of Oculus recently was announced, Persson said, "Look, they offered me a lot of headsets in this deal. I simply couldn't turn that down. I also get a seat on the board. Although that doesn't give me any actual input into Facebook's future, the seat itself is extremely comfortable - and the boardroom has some really nice paneling."
  When asked about the deal, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg commented, "Minecraft is yet another in a series of strategic acquisitions as we evolve Facebook from a social gaming platform into a social gaming platform. Also, Markus will make a fine addition to Facebook's board; I know we'll receive some top-notch input from him as the board continues to consider future options for the seating and paneling in our boardroom."
2. Re:April Fool's day : new date in march ? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 03:38 · Score: 0
  
  Yeah... one submits April Fools stories early hoping the editors will take their time to publish them, and sync with the date, but then they've had the extra strong coffee today, so that plan is foiled.
  But not to worry. We'll get the April Fools stories until the 5th or so :)
Clinically dead but technically still alive by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 00:30 · Score: 0

If this is successful, will the clinical definition of what is considered "dead" be changed?
1. Re:Clinically dead but technically still alive by Sentrion · 2014-03-28 10:06 · Score: 1
  
  That just depends on how much the hospital can bill the family, and if the family will pay. If the family says they can have the money in about a week, then "surprise" the patient comes out of suspended animation in about a week, somewhat like how mentally ill patients are released as "successfully treated" as soon as insurance runs out. If the family doesn't have enough income, assets or insurance to even settle for 10% of the bill, then "sorry for your loss, little Johnny is clinically dead."
2. Re: Clinically dead but technically still alive by MrsBudgreen · 2014-03-28 15:28 · Score: 1
  
  Uhh no. When it's a life or death situation the goal is to keep the patient alive. No doctors want a patient to die on their watch; it doesn't look good. Also, if you did research you'd know a person can only be held in a suspended state for a few hours.
Wow, undergrads will do anything! by grasshoppa · 2014-03-28 00:33 · Score: 1

How do you suppose they advertise this? "Need subjects for really cool study! $10s and all the ice cubes you can eat! Must have own gun/knife."

--
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
1. Re:Wow, undergrads will do anything! by ThatsDrDangerToYou · 2014-03-28 01:41 · Score: 1
  
  Free beer?
do you want to be a zombie? by stenvar · 2014-03-28 00:42 · Score: 1

There are good reasons for refusing such treatments: they may very well leave you with serious brain damage, i.e., a "zombie". Even for resuscitation after regular heart attack, brain damage is so common that some people would rather be dead than take the risk. I probably would rather die than take the risk, but unfortunately there is no way to get paramedics to honor such a request reliably.
1. Re:do you want to be a zombie? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 02:21 · Score: 0
  
  D.N.R?
2. Re:do you want to be a zombie? by HornWumpus · 2014-03-28 03:55 · Score: 1
  
  Tattooed on your chest?
  
  --
  John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Dr. Reheat??? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 00:45 · Score: 0

Just change a couple of letters in Rheeat and you have Reheat. How appropriate.
1. Re:Dr. Reheat??? by kirjoittaessani · 2014-03-28 00:56 · Score: 2
  
  According to TFA, he is called Rhee (at the University of Arizona in Tucson), not Rheeat.
Better ways to pay for college by lagomorpha2 · 2014-03-28 01:08 · Score: 2

"10 gunshot and stabbing victims will take part in the trials."
There's a double-blind trial I'm glad I didn't sign up for.
Is it wrong to say... by MrsBudgreen · 2014-03-28 01:11 · Score: 1

I have to point out the fact that the human population really doesn't need more medical breakthroughs that continue to lower the death toll. Let people die!
1. Re:Is it wrong to say... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 12:04 · Score: 0
  
  I have to point out the fact that the human population really doesn't need more medical breakthroughs that continue to lower the death toll.
  Let people die!
  You first, asshat!!!
Has been seen in scifi by Zarhan · 2014-03-28 01:17 · Score: 1

Pushing Ice by Alastair Reynolds has this tech. The author points out in the afterword that this actually one of the few things that might be reality even today - apparently it's now starting to appear more widely...
Anyway, sounds good, I wonder how far the preservation could continue. The old cryogenics scenarios start to come into mind...
You Can't Go Home Again by westlake · 2014-03-28 01:25 · Score: 1

In the end it will also not matter, because when these people reach the distant location, there will be no compatible civilization on earth left. There is no point in deep space travel as long as we are not able to go faster than light or at least close to light speed.
The long-lived Howard Families of Heinlein's "Methuselah's Children" (1941) weren't looking for a way back, they were looking for a way out --- having abandoned all hope of finding a safe refuge within the Solar System.
The historical parallels are many.
In many ways, the experience is universal.
In my family history, I see refugees from the religious wars that began with the Reformation, others driven into exile by the Scottish Clearances, the Irish Potato Famine...
+1 for the opt-out crowd! by generic_screenname · 2014-03-28 01:25 · Score: 1

Thanks for the link. It's not exactly obvious where and how to opt out of such things.
I'm keeping my fingers crossed by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 01:30 · Score: 0

I live in Pittsburgh where this trial is occurring, I hope I'm one of the lucky ones that gets shot or stabbed
Pro-tip by rlp · 2014-03-28 01:38 · Score: 1

When the ship's computer wakes you early to report a strange distress signal from an previously uncharted star system - reset the navigation towards earth and go back to suspended animation.

--
[Insert pithy quote here]
No one opt'd out? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 01:53 · Score: 0

because the adverts were in "newspapers" ?
Consent? by wisnoskij · 2014-03-28 02:02 · Score: 1

How are they going to get consent? And are they only going to only do this for the otherwise hopeless cases?
The logistics sound impossible. They are going to need a lot or equipment, including a huge tank to store the cold saline solution and another for the blood. They cannot send this out with every ambulance.

--
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
1. Re:Consent? by Areyoukiddingme · 2014-03-28 07:30 · Score: 1
  
  The logistics sound impossible. They are going to need a lot or equipment, including a huge tank to store the cold saline solution and another for the blood. They cannot send this out with every ambulance.
  You watch way too many horror movies. The average adult male has about 1 gallon of blood. The average adult female has about a pint less. It's not a very big tank.
For our Future's Sake by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 02:12 · Score: 0

No one stab or shoot Wesley Snipes for the next month...
Why not just cool the blood? by wisnoskij · 2014-03-28 02:13 · Score: 1

It would be a hell of a lot easier. Suck it out, chill it with a small cooler, and pump it right back in. Put a funnel under the wounds and just pump whatever leaks out back in.

--
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
1. Re:Why not just cool the blood? by compro01 · 2014-03-28 03:15 · Score: 1
  
  I suspect that the low temperatures would make the blood too viscous to flow properly.
  
  --
  upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
He's a goner... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 03:10 · Score: 0

"All right folks, let's suspend him."
"But, but, he's still moving. Did you hear that? He said, 'Help me.' Just now!"
"Look, McGuffin, it doesn't work if you wait till he dies."
"But he might not die!"
"He will if we just stand here and watch him. Your choice."
"I'll get the ice cubes."
Am I the only one...? by haneefmubarak · 2014-03-28 03:13 · Score: 1

who read his name as "Reheat" the first time around? :)
What type of people though? by nefus · 2014-03-28 03:14 · Score: 1

Aren't the people who get brought in for these types of injuries typically gang bangers and drug related? So if successful, they are freezing people who can't make it in our world and pushing them into the future where they will never be able to make it socially. LOL!
SAW XII: They Can Torture You Forever by fygment · 2014-03-28 03:20 · Score: 3, Insightful

In which the victim's are cut and hacked until almost dead ... then suspended ... repaired ... and the fun begins again.
Combine this with the seriously chilling 'time dilation' drug and the future just seems a little darker.

--
"Consensus" in science is _always_ a political construct.
1. Re:SAW XII: They Can Torture You Forever by abies · 2014-03-28 06:23 · Score: 1
  
  If I could only remember the name of the book... it was collection of short stories, centered about certain drug which was allowing people to transfer conciousness to next body. One of the stories was about usage of that by totalitarian government, which was catching political rebels and torturing them to death repeateadly transferring their mind to new body after each time - until they finally changed their opinions to the point of being able to convince everybody they have been reeducated.
Can't wait for by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 06:21 · Score: 0

I can't wait for "board with a nail in it" control!
opt-in via web site by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 07:29 · Score: 0

It's the nature of this particular beast that there's NO WAY of giving consent.
Well, they seem to think people can give their non-consent via the opt-out on that web site. Surely they could turn it around and ask for people to opt-in instead.
Sounds just like Lois McMaster Bujold's Vorkosigan by samwichse · 2014-03-28 07:43 · Score: 1

This tech sounds similar to what they do in the Vorkosigan series. Sick or severely injured people have all their blood dumped/flushed with a cryo fluid and then are held until they are operated on or cured in the future of whatever disease ailed them.
Or they were supposed to be. Cryoburn goes into the implications in some detail. The protagonist gets carted out in a cryo coffin several times (and lost once).
The author really nailed it with this article though.
Sam
So how many thousands of monkeys by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 07:52 · Score: 0

did they try this on first and how many died? What about horses, bears, cows, etc with larger body weights?
Don't tell animal rights wackos get them to only test on humans
Telephone sanitizers by fox171171 · 2014-03-28 09:01 · Score: 1

Depends upon your definition of "qualified"
There would be millions of volunteers. If you need a thousand, you could pick the top 0.1%.
Well, we all know that the telephone sanitizers are the first to board...
Gunshot Victims? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 09:36 · Score: 0

I love the title of the Slashdot post...

Gunshot Victims To Be Part of "Suspended Animation" Trials
No mention of whether the victim is deceased or not in the title. Kind of reminded me of Monty Python :) "Victim" doesn't mean dead :)
"I'm not dead yet!"
Brilliant! by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 09:41 · Score: 0

This makes SO much more sense than stopping people from shooting each other up. Or say, spending billions on cancer research instead of simply stopping smoking and polluting the air and water.
Well, hey. Let's just keep doing what's easy. An when bringing people back from the dead is the new definition of "easy", you gotta wonder how hard solving those other problems is. Oops. Apples and Oranges. One is just technology. Those other problems are political. Clever species we got here, eh?
Dr. Peter Rheeat - Dr. Peter Reheat by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-28 09:43 · Score: 0

Dr. Peter Reheat sounds like the best cryosurgeon ever.
How about someone calling all non-whites "darkies" by denzacar · 2014-03-28 11:02 · Score: 2

An example of a racist would be someone who implies that all Muslims/Arabs are a single race and calls people racists for saying derogatory things about them.
Calling someone a "darkie" is a racial slur but is not precise about a race it is referring to.
You can have you spick darkies, your nigger darkies, your sand nigger darkies, even your chink darkies.
Now... How about calling someone who bunches all those people as "darkies" a racist, for "saying derogatory things about them"?
Is that racist too?
See how that goes? A racist does not have to be precise about their derogatory terms and actions to be racist.
They can even be extra nice to the people in question and still be racist.
That's because racism and racist slurs all in the intent of the user - not the person it is aimed at OR the third party observer.
Which is why it is perfectly normal for the most of the world to call all those people with black skin simply blacks without being racist.
Instead of coming up with a PC term involving Africa and a local national distinction.
Imagine the faux pas a Frenchman would commit for calling a Jamaican blackman a "French African". Oh boy!
Ah! But should he call him an "African" implying that "they are all alike" and more - that's racism and the person doing that is a racist.
And more importantly - a FUCKING RETARDED ASSHOLE.
So you see... it does not really matter how we call that person who goes around "saying derogatory things about them" - as long that term is synonymous with being a FUCKING RETARDED ASSHOLE.
Racist, nationalist, fascist, ethnicist, religionist... it's all the same.
And it's OK. Really. It is!
There is no moral or political issue with calling someone who is a FUCKING RETARDED ASSHOLE a FUCKING RETARDED ASSHOLE.
Regardless of their persuasion and the brand of their retardedness.

--
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
Re:How about someone calling all non-whites "darki by Chrisq · 2014-03-28 21:27 · Score: 0

Allow a 'retard' to point out an elementary flaw in your argument:

Calling someone a "darkie" is a racial slur but is not precise about a race it is referring to.
Actually it is being precise in setting non-dark races apart from others. This is probably one of the most common forms of racism.

with calling someone who is a FUCKING RETARDED ASSHOLE

Ah the typical Muslim reaction, if you can't dispute what someone says but you don't like it then insult them. The interesting thing is that by your definitions (not mine) this would make you a racist ... by insulting people who oppose islamic terrorism you are targeting a group who are exclusively non-muslim - which you see as a racial division.
Re:How about someone calling all non-whites "darki by denzacar · 2014-03-29 00:38 · Score: 0

Well hello there, you fucking retarded asshole!
Nice to see you taking offense at calling racists FUCKING RETARDED ASSHOLES, followed by arguing just the right racist points (as if being non-white is a valid racial determination), followed by assumptions about the identity of someone you see as an opponent and sweeping generalizations about those identity assumptions...
Even literally arguing the idea that every member of group A should be OK with everything group A does, including bad and evil things, as long as it is aimed against those outside the group A and those opposing it.
Ain't generalizations grand?
And this, children, is how you recognize FUCKING RETARDED ASSHOLES - by what they are against and by what they support through their "logic".
In this case, we have a defender of racists, supporter of the idea of "non-white" as a determining factor of one's identity (just like calling both a rabbit and a fox "not a cow"), a believer in "tribal enemies" AND paranoid hater of over a billion humans whom he has generalized into his own personal scarecrow.
And how do we call someone like that?
A FUCKING RETARDED ASSHOLE!

--
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
Re: How about someone calling all non-whites "dark by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-29 09:07 · Score: 0

Either you are an idiot or you are creating strawmen. Q Chris has not supported racism or opposed anything except Islam. He has not classed non- whites as a single racial group, but said that it is racist of whites to discriminate against all other groups. Do you think it is not racist if you hate more than one different group or are you just being an idiot?
Premature April fools joke? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-30 01:49 · Score: 0

Premature April fools joke?
Hypocrite by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-06 02:32 · Score: 0

Witness the SHEER INTELLIGENCE (lol - NOT) of Sardaukar86 http://news.slashdot.org/comme... & http://news.slashdot.org/comme...
Forgive this, troll by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-06 02:34 · Score: 0

Witness the SHEER INTELLIGENCE (lol - NOT) of Sardaukar86 http://news.slashdot.org/comme... & http://news.slashdot.org/comme...