Horst Gruenler, 85, is not the oldest member of the Cryonics Institute, and Michelle Porter, 13 (daughter of York and Lois Porter), is not the youngest. But they were the oldest and youngest respectively at the annual meeting Sep. 29.
Mr. Gruenler, and most of us in or beyond middle age, will almost certainly require cryostasis to secure our chance of extended life. But it is profoundly significant to appreciate that Michelle, and those younger, may never encounter natural death. Before their scheduled time, we may gain control of the aging process, including physiological age reversal. Michelle may grow older for a while, then stop aging, and finally revert to her ideal adult physical age. Humanity will then be essentially immortal. (But for a long time we may still need cryonics to stabilize those who die from strange diseases or certain types of accident.)
We already have medications that have shown spectacular success in extending the life spans of laboratory animals--perhaps as much as 50% in the case of deprenyl. One injectable synthetic growth hormone--has actually reversed aging in humans, although only by modest amounts and only by a few specific criteria (muscle gain, fat loss, bone density gain, skin thickness gain) plus anecdotal benefit in energy and libido. Extrapolating from these to full control and reversibility of aging is exceedingly difficult; still, as always, many of us fools rush in where the angels fear to tread, and guesstimates range most commonly from 50 years to 100 years.
Suppose we take the reasonably conservative 100 year estimate of the time we still need for the conquest of aging. That doesn’t mean that all those now alive must die of old age, because the partial successes already seen, and the others nearly certain to come, will steadily increase the expectancy. If Michelle's actuarial expectancy is now 80, then (if her health remains otherwise good), this will gradually increase; by the time she reaches 80, her expectancy may well be 113. In that case, she could reach the magic marker, grow younger, and stabilize, in permanent youthful good health.
It is nearly impossible--even for long-time immortalists--fully to appreciate the significance of this potential. For one thing, it means we are now at or near the watershed of history, the great divide between mortality and immortality; of the generations now living, the older will probably have to die (at least temporarily); the younger may never die. This has to revolutionize the way we think about our children and grandchildren--hence about ourselves.
It is one thing to reconcile yourself to being just a link in a chain, or a passer of the baton--if those following will be the same. But if you are destined to be merely fertilizer, while others bloom forever in the sunlight--then it is different. To contemplate the possibility of some distant descendants becoming immortal and superhuman is one thing; to look at real, live people, and consider their going merrily on forever while you moulder: that is something else.
There are many ways to attempt to anticipate--date--the coming sea change in attitudes. The most optimistic would result from predicting full aging reversal in 10 or 20 years--as a few hardy souls have done.. Personally, I remember too well the many over-optimistic expectations down the years. Around 1930 one of the Sunday supplements pictured the world of "50 years hence" (i.e., 1980), and it included flying family flivvers. In 1991, no sign of flying family flivvers. Commercial fusion energy is said to be 20 years away, which is what they said 40 years ago .... On the other hand, we have some things already that were not anticipated at all, for example in computers and quantum effects and in imaging and the nascent technology of. molecular engineering. So it's a toss-up.
The most crucial question is the psychological/social/political evolution. Will popular interest and serious attention and economic investment roughly parallel the stepwise advances, for example? Or will major activity wait until there is a clear-cut breakthrough in age control or/and suspended animation? Will only a relatively few activists try the new methods until the results can no longer be generally ignored? Will the FDA demand a large double-bind human sample over a 30 year period before approving new treatments? Will nothing happen until increased life expectancy significantly affects actuarial tables, social security collections and payments, and the tax base? Will some public figure make a public commitment and start a stampede? Or will some hidden ground-swell of popular appreciation suddenly break the surface and remake the world? Stay tuned.
What is nearly certain is that, when there is finally a meaningful popular focus on gerontology, cryonics will not be far behind. When it finally, finally dawns on everyone that their stake in the future is personal and immeasurably huge, then a bridge to that future will have heavy traffic.
Meanwhile, we use what we have and we do what we can--and that is a lot.
Robert C.W. Ettinger
Email us at: cryonics@cryonics.org
[Home] [Contents] [FAQ] [Links] [About Cryonics]
[What to Read] [Becoming A Member]
Home Page