Go back  

It's Not Personal

September 7 2009 at 2:09 PM
Melody Maxim  (Login melmax)
Filtered User

Response to Making things personal...

"You have not established that CI-81 is dead by information-theoretic criteria, nor do you show any interest in doing so. You keep changing the subject, doing everything you can to avoid answering my questions."

I am not the one changing the subject, but a lot of other people, (now to include Luke), have tried to do that. I have never claimed to be able to establish that CI-81 is dead by information-theoretic criteria. I can't do that, any more than Luke can prove the opposite. (However I will say that I believe Aubrey de Grey and I agree on the types of injuries that would result in information-theoretic death, (as we've discussed it, before), and that I believe SA's patients have been subjected to that degree of damage.)

My argument, all along, from Day One has been that the medical procedures being used during washout procedures are well-established procedures; that there are plenty of people capable of competently performing them and that the needed equipment exists; and that LEF and Suspended Animation, Inc. (SA) can afford to provide that level of care. Instead, they consistently send a bevy of amateurs who can't get the job done properly.

For someone to come here and attempt to distract from that, wanting me to prove CI-81 "is dead by information-theoretic criteria" is a logical fallacy. Fundamentally, my argument is that someone who receives the proper medical care, (a timely femoral cannulation, and competent perfusion), has a much better chance of waking up again, than someone who is subjected to quite a few hours of mild-to-moderate hypothermia, some really shoddy cannulation attempts that would qualify as "butchering," and/or inappropriate perfusion pressures.

Unlike my detractors, I don't think I have personally attacked anyone. I haven't lied about anyone, or relayed information about their personal lives, of which I know plenty. Personally, I don't think I'm the "hostile" one, here. I believe the people who "dismiss (me) as hostile" mostly do so because they have no defense to my legitimate criticisms. (Or, maybe because I bust their bubble, in that fairytale they are living.)

"It could be an entirely true accusation for all I know -- I just haven't seen you resorting to actual evidence when challenged."

Again, my accusation is that SA did not provide proper medical care, which they could easily afford to provide, and that they inflicted harm on all of their patients. I believe I can, (and at this point, would welcome the opportunity to), prove that in a court of law, as writing here doesn't seem to accomplish much.

"This isn't high school anymore, we're all adults. These petty accusations and games are not worth our time."

You could have fooled me, because it seems a lot like high school. Accusations of medical malpractice are not "petty." I suppose Luke thinks our time would be better spent discussing advanced medical procedures and neuroscience, with a bunch of laymen who can't perform medical procedures that were virtually perfected decades ago. I happen to think it would be best to convince Kent and Faloon, and Alcor, to spend their millions on competent care providers. Anyone of reasonable intelligence should be capable of understanding that minimizing the damage done during a cryopreservation maximizes the potential of being able to repair that damage.

 Respond to this message   

Find more forums on Science and TechnologyCreate your own forum at Network54
 Copyright © 1999-2018 Network54. All rights reserved.   Terms of Use   Privacy Statement