X
Alcor is hosting its 50th anniversary conference!
REGISTER NOW!
Max More

Preferred Life Extension Language

/in /by

In a recent informal survey, I asked what terms people preferred to indicate not only that you want to live not only longer than average, but longer than the current human maximum. That term or another might also be used to indicate that you support an organized effort to enable anyone who wants it to live possibly centuries or more in excellent health. Saying, “I want to live longer” does not convey the intended meaning adequately.  Perhaps the most common term for this is “life extension” or “extended life”.

Out of around three dozen responses, “life extension” was the most popular choice. As expected, almost no one favored “immortality” with several people noting that it was not literally correct and probably impossible and also had distracting connotations. Several liked my suggested “chosen lifespan” or some other term emphasizing choice, such as “personal lifespan”. These have the benefit of conveying individual choice and putting the burden on those who oppose life extension for people other than themselves.

Other terms that got some explicit support:

Indefinite lifespan/extension

Extended lifespan

Superlongevity

Hyperlongevity

Other terms that received an honorable mention:

Age reversal, curing aging, death free, ending aging, expanding lifespan, extended longevity, healthy life extension, immortality, indefinite health extension, life expansion, longer life, managed aging, optional aging, optional mortality, overcoming age-related decline, personal lifespan, rejuvenation, reversing aging.

In an upcoming issue of Cryonics dealing with effective communication about life extension and cryonics, I will comment further on these options. Thanks to those of you who provided input. It’s not too late if you want to add your thoughts.

–Max More

alcor

Work out your cryo-brain with the Q2 2020 issue of Cryonics magazine

/in , /by

By Max More

Looking for a cryonics-laden brain workout? Check out the Q2 2020 issue of Cryonics. The single weightiest piece in this issue is “Mathematics and Modeling in Cryonics: Some Historical Highlights” by R. Michael Perry and Aschwin de Wolf. If you find yourself arguing with a critic who says cryonics is based on wishful thinking and not analysis, shove this article at them. As the authors show, mathematics and modeling have been used in cryonics since the very early days. Even back in the early 1970s, Art Quaife used mathematical analysis to model early perfusion systems and then followed up with a 1985 paper examining heat flow in the cryopreservation of humans.

I remember reading a fascinating article by biochemist Hugh Hixon, a long-time Alcor staff member, back in 1988 titled “How Cold is Cold Enough?”. The authors explain that Hixon chose the fastest known biological reaction, catalase and then compared reaction rates as the temperature is lowered from body temperature (37°C) on down. Chemical reactions that happen in one second at body temperature would take about 25 million years at the temperature of liquid nitrogen. Hixon addressed the question of how cold you need to go to not have to worry any further. In reality, below about -135°C, biochemical reactions would slow down far more than his methods suggested because “translational molecular motion is inhibited so safe storage of almost indefinite length should be possible”.

I also found engaging other pieces analyzing the effects of time and chemistry on the quality of cryopreservation. Several people have pondered the question of what cooling rate would be needed to escape ischemic injury. Authors Perry and de Wolf have both delved into the question, and Steve Harris developed a possible indicator in his E-HIT (equivalent homeothermic ischemic time) measure. We use a version of that measure in Alcor’s operating room to tell us when to cease cardiopulmonary support and begin surgery. This measure substitutes cooling rate for a fixed temperature.

There’s plenty more fascinating work examined here. (Really. You don’t have to be a mathematician to be fascinated, I promise.) For instance, cryobiologists Gregory Fahy, Brian Wowk and others at 21st Century Medicine (21CM) uncovered a method of predicting the toxicity of cryoprotective solutions to a fair accuracy based on their molecular constituents, and Perry used his mathematical mind to predict future cryonics caseloads.

If that doesn’t satisfy you, you will find more computational work related to cryonics in scholar profile and Q&A with Roman Bauer, followed by his article “Computational Neuroscience and Cryonics: Strangers that are Just Friends Waiting to Happen”. For a change of pace, I especially enjoyed David Brandt-Erichsen’s critical review of the 1988 Star Trek: The Next Generation episode, “The Neutral Zone”. David echoes my own reactions to an episode that somehow both shows cryonics working while mindlessly repeating the “we need death” rationalization.

alcor

Coronavirus Trends in States with Many Alcor Members

/in /by

In my June 16 post I said I would look at other states which are home to many Alcor members. In those five days, Arizona’s confirmed case count has risen 28%. The 7-day moving average has hit three new highs. Mandatory mask-wearing has been imposed in most cities, including Scottsdale and Phoenix. What about California, Florida, and Texas? Those three states account for about 45% of all US Alcor members.

California
7-day moving average here.

Infection rate, positive test rate, ICU headroom used, and contacts traced are here.

Florida
7-day moving average here.

Infection rate, positive test rate, ICU headroom used, and contacts traced are here.

Texas
7-day moving average here.

Infection rate, positive test rate, ICU headroom used, and contacts traced are here.

According to this source, cases are increasing in these states:
CA, TX, FL, GA, NC, AZ, LA, OH, TN, AL, SC, UT, AK, NV, KS, OK, OR, ID, WV, WY, HI.

The change in positive test rates can indicate likely future trajectories for hospital utilization and deaths. Those numbers should be considered in the context of whether testing is increasing or decreasing. You can find a comparison of states on both measures here.

–Max More
Ambassador and President Emeritus, Alcor Foundation

alcor

COVID-19 Trends in Arizona

/in /by

COVID-19 is a once-in-a-lifetime pandemic caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus. SARS, MERS, Ebola, and swine flu don’t come close in the number of deaths and disruption of COVID-19 to the economy and everyday life. Today, just three months since the pandemic was formally announced, saw the largest number of new confirmed daily cases at 134,705 globally.

Members who read Alcor News will have been alerted to how we have prepared Alcor’s offices and services here in Arizona for the COVID-19 pandemic. Until very recently, Arizona was one of the least affected states. That has not made much difference to Alcor and its staff since we still have to care for members throughout the country and abroad – and we have to take special precautions to remain uninfected and ready to respond.

The Arizona situation has changed. Along with states such as California and Texas, Arizona has moved close to the top of the list of new cases per day. The first case detected in Arizona was on January 26, 2020. This was a 20-year-old male student of Arizona State University (ASU), who had traveled to Wuhan, China. Curiously, this case was the fifth reported COVID-19 case overall in the United States at the time. Despite that and unlike Washington, Arizona did not see an early rapid rise in cases.

In Arizona, May 25th marked a transition from lengthening to shortening doubling times. In the last week, the doubling time has continued to shorten. On May 1, there were 7,962 confirmed cases, an increase of 314. Today, on June 10 (the end of the day determined by GMT), there were 29,852 cases, an increase of 1,556. That’s a disturbingly rapid daily increase of 5.5%.

Whatever the future holds, Alcor remains prepared and ready. We have been lucky so far. That appears to be changing. Arizona will no longer be a good place to move to in order to avoid infection. If you have major medical issues and are considering relocating near Alcor, you should speak with Blake Honiotes, Alcor’s Medical Response Director.

–Max More
Ambassador and President Emeritus, Alcor Foundation