Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Mad Scientist Brings Back Dead With "Deanimation"

kdawson posted more than 5 years ago | from the way-science-should-be dept.

Biotech 501

mattnyc99 writes "Esquire is running a a jaw-dropping profile of MacArthur genius Marc Roth in their annual Best and Brightest roundup, detailing how this gonzo DNA scientist (who also figured out how to diagnose lupus correctly) went from watching his infant daughter die to literally reincarnating animals. Inspired by NOVA and funded by DARPA, Roth has developed a serum for major biotech startup Ikaria that successfully accomplished 'suspended animation' — the closest we've ever come to simulating near-death experiences and then coming back to life. From the article: 'We don't know what life is, anyway. Not really. We just know what life does — it burns oxygen. It's a process of combustion. We're all just slow-burning candles, making our way through our allotment of precious O2 until it becomes our toxin, until we burn out, until we get old and die. But we live on 21 percent oxygen, just as we live at 37 degrees. They're related. Decrease the oxygen to 5 percent, we die. But, look, the concentration of oxygen in the blood that runs through our capillaries is only 2 or 3 percent. We're almost dead already! So what if we turn down the candle's need for oxygen? What if we dim the candle so much that we don't even have the energy to die?' " The writer Tom Junod engages in what Hunter Thompson once called "a failed but essentially noble experiment in pure gonzo journalism." If you can suspend your inner critic for a time, it's a fun ride.

cancel ×

501 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

First Undead Post! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25968195)

Braiiiiins!

Re:First Undead Post! (1, Funny)

angryfirelord (1082111) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968341)

pew pew pew

Reanimator! (4, Funny)

girlintraining (1395911) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968205)

Klatu Verata Nictu!

Re:Reanimator! (5, Funny)

jebrew (1101907) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968647)

necktie?

Early Cryogenics & Ethical Problems (4, Insightful)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968213)

This reminds me of a This American Life episode I listened to (and you can too by clicking on Full Episode here [thislife.org] ). Basically it explores a very bad chapter of early cryogenics. Before I listened to that, I thought that this was pretty cut and dried ethically (dead bodies are dead bodies, do what you want) but you see how it negatively affects other people who misplace hope in this process.

Also, isn't Ikaria the worst name to pick [wikipedia.org] ? "Hey, our company hopes to aim too high and fail hard." They should have gone with Promethea [wikipedia.org] in my opinion.

Herbert West - Reanimator (1)

incripshin (580256) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968237)

This sounds just like a story by H.P. Lovecraft, Herbert West—Reanimator [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Herbert West - Reanimator (5, Informative)

incripshin (580256) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968265)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_West%E2%80%93Reanimator [wikipedia.org]
I don't know how I could have messed that up.

Re:Herbert West - Reanimator (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25968887)

I don't know how I could have messed that up.

That's exactly what this guy'll say when he's locked himself inside his underground laboratory to keep out the hordes of flesh eating undead.

DARPA! (5, Interesting)

staryc (852301) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968249)

Is it any coincidence that DARPA is Sanskrit for arrogance in this situation?

Re:DARPA! (2, Funny)

Kopiok (898028) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968795)

Yes, yes it is.

Whoa boy... (5, Insightful)

Chicken_Kickers (1062164) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968263)

I think this article will open up a can of worms on Slashdot. The issue I have here is that bringing someone back from suspended animation where they were alive to begin with is not the same as 'reviving the dead'. I think nature has been doing this in hibernating animals for millions of years. If someone could freeze a medically dead person and then make him alive again with his memories, personality etc. intact, (i.e. not cloning, which is already feasible) then they can claim they have revived the dead. Other than that, it is just playing with semantics.

Re:Whoa boy... (3, Interesting)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968411)

The issue I have here is that bringing someone back from suspended animation where they were alive to begin with ...

Here's a better question: When do you think anyone in their right mind will ok that procedure? Think about it, you're taking a perfectly alive human being and ... putting them at risk of death? For the purposes of? I know someone will compare this to the risk of life we took putting someone on the moon but I see little to no merit in this procedure.

If you think they're going to run into federal problems, that's only the start of it. This is probably going to be a always-20-years-away technology although it does make for entertainment.

Space travel etc. (5, Insightful)

Chicken_Kickers (1062164) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968523)

Well, this could be useful in space travel, barring we develop hyperdrives. Sci fi have been playing around with sleeper ship concepts for decades. It might also be useful for people who have terminal cancer for example, who might want to opt to be frozen in the hope of a cure being developed during the interim (though there will be the problem of reintegrating into society after even just a few years). A more plausible use maybe is to put into suspended animation a critically injured person until he can be transported to a hospital and treated to minimise cell damage (assuming the serum does less damage).

Re:Whoa boy... (4, Insightful)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968553)

Meh. It'll be a standard procedure in 5 years. "Ok, so what the anesthetist is going to do is stop your heart. Then we'll cut two small incisions in your chest and I'll insert this tiny camera.. [blah blah blah, rest of the standard keyhole surgery speech] .. and once we're all finished, the anesthetist will start your heart again."

This stuff isn't that revolutionary.. it's just a neat trick to stop you getting brain damage when you're not getting enough oxygen.

Re:Whoa boy... (4, Interesting)

Matimus (598096) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968773)

Seriously? If I was bleeding to death, and there was no equipment around to stop the bleeding enough to keep me alive, I would welcome this procedure.

You are correct that there is no good reason to do this for fun, but if the choice is death or entering a potentially risky state of suspended animation, I will choose the later.

Keep in mind that the majority of the research is for exactly that purpose.

Re:Whoa boy... (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25968875)

> Here's a better question: When do you think anyone in their
> right mind will ok that procedure? Think about it, you're
> taking a perfectly alive human being and ... putting them at
> risk of death? For the purposes of? I know someone will
> compare this to the risk of life we took putting someone on
> the moon but I see little to no merit in this procedure.

You are not being very imaginative.
Imagine a sick patient, in need of a long and complex heart
operation. Imagine that the risk of complications during the
procedure is extremely high.
Imagine that you could put the patient in suspended animation,
perform the risky procedure, and 'reanimate' the patient only
when his pieces are correctly put together.

I think this is something worth pursuing, although it will
not probably happen tomorrow or next week.

Re:Whoa boy... (5, Informative)

Emperor Zombie (1082033) | more than 5 years ago | (#25969069)

If you'd RTFA (shocking, I know), you'd see that DARPA was interested in it as a way of preventing wounded people from bleeding out. It's already being tested on humans.

Re:Whoa boy... (4, Funny)

girlintraining (1395911) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968525)

Well thanks for totally ruining our fun. Next you'll be telling us snacks are bad for us and we can't play slayers and vampires anymore with those colored sticks with string on them from that construction site nearby. They make great stakes you know! What's wrong with having a little fun, serious-face? You're almost as bad as that guy with the bright orange hat outside that's been swearing for the last hour.

Re:Whoa boy... (5, Insightful)

TheLazySci-FiAuthor (1089561) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968579)

Semantics, agreed.

Of course, in true Slashdottian hyperbole, were this serum to be completely viable, I could see some kind of auto-release nano-canisters being injected into the bloodstream of soldiers, so that in the event of explosive death, an instant release of the substance could assure that all the pieces quickly 'go to sleep' and await pickup/cleanup by the wandering red cross medical roombas for delivery to the reconstruction/reanimation tent.

That would be pretty close to dying and being brought back methinks.

Might make a good extreme sport as well!

Re:Whoa boy... (1)

AngryScotsman (775193) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968821)

I think nature has been doing this in hibernating animals for millions of years.

You just wait until one of those dinosaurs emerges from it's long sleep under the Antarctic ice!

Near death != death (3, Insightful)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968271)

You're either dead or you're not. It's rather binary. There's no continuum.

Re:Near death != death (5, Funny)

Wonko the Sane (25252) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968323)

You forgot about mostly dead.

Re:Near death != death (4, Funny)

girlintraining (1395911) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968567)

Yes, your friend here is only mostly dead. Had he been all dead there would have been only one thing to do -- go through his pockets for spare change.

Re:Near death != death (1)

ArbitraryDescriptor (1257752) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968729)

In that case, the only thing better than this discovery is a well made BMT.

Re:Near death != death (1)

ichthyoboy (1167379) | more than 5 years ago | (#25969109)

How about an MLT, where the mutton is nice and lean....

Re:Near death != death (5, Funny)

Captain Splendid (673276) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968351)

You're either dead or you're not. It's rather binary. There's no continuum.

Schrodinger's cat says hi. Or maybe he doesn't.

Re:Near death != death (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25969201)

schrodinger's cat talked!? no wonder he put it in a box - that'd freak anyone out!

(kind of spoils his theory too... "hey! HEY! Let me out of this box you &$%#!". definitely alive)

Re:Near death != death (5, Funny)

reginaldo (1412879) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968355)

Whoo-hoo-hoo, look who knows so much. It just so happens that you can be MOSTLY dead as well.

There's a big difference between mostly dead and all dead. Mostly dead is slightly alive. With all dead, well, with all dead there's usually only one thing you can do.

Go through his clothes and look for loose change.

/*obligatory miracle max

Re:Near death != death (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25968361)

"Whoo-hoo-hoo, look who knows so much. There's a big difference between mostly dead and all dead." --Miracle Max

Re:Near death != death (5, Insightful)

girlintraining (1395911) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968369)

Either you're dead or you're not--Tell that to someone who's brain dead. Or someone who's suffered a stroke that effects their brain stem, or people that suffer from being "locked in". Tell that to someone who 'died' on the operating table during heart surgery but 'came back'. What exactly constitutes being "alive" verus dead? Are self-replicating proteins "alive"? Because last I looked, prions are not alive though they can kill you (mad cow disease). And this isn't even discussing non-literal definitions of dead or alive -- such as being emotionally dead (suicidal thoughts anyone?), concepts of heaven and hell, etc.

There is indeed quite a spectrum between dead and alive; Life has never been easy to classify and put into boxes, because the curious thing about it is you never observe the same thing twice looking at it.

Re:Near death != death (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968519)

"because the curious thing about it is you never observe the same thing twice looking at it."

Instead of looking at it from when life ends, perhaps you should look at it as when death begins.

Re:Near death != death (1)

the_humeister (922869) | more than 5 years ago | (#25969195)

Either you're dead or you're not--Tell that to someone who's brain dead.

The seat of consciousness is in the brain. If that goes, all other aspects that made that person who he is is gone. By that definition brain dead = dead.

Or someone who's suffered a stroke that effects their brain stem

He's alive until his breathing machine is turned off (assuming only a minor brain stem infarct).

or people that suffer from being "locked in".

Brain's still active, so not dead. Still alive.

Tell that to someone who 'died' on the operating table during heart surgery but 'came back'.

Brain is still alive. He's not dead.

What exactly constitutes being "alive" verus dead? Are self-replicating proteins "alive"? Because last I looked, prions are not alive though they can kill you (mad cow disease). And this isn't even discussing non-literal definitions of dead or alive -- such as being emotionally dead (suicidal thoughts anyone?), concepts of heaven and hell, etc.

There is indeed quite a spectrum between dead and alive; Life has never been easy to classify and put into boxes, because the curious thing about it is you never observe the same thing twice looking at it.

The rest of the post doesn't really make much sense.

Re:Near death != death (4, Informative)

TWX (665546) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968387)

People have been clinically dead (no pulse, no breathing, would not continue to live without specific processes of intervention) and have been successfully revived. Many have gone on to live perfectly normal lives, while others have been left dead too long and their tissues suffered for it, leaving them with reduced faculties. I wouldn't call it quite as cut and dried as dead or not. We can tell when someone is really, truly alive, and we can identify conditions when someone is really, truly dead, but there are plenty of conditions where one could be potentially alive or dead (with apologies to SchrÃdinger) and that further actions will determine what state a person goes into.

Re:Near death != death (1)

TWX (665546) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968405)

damn misinterpretation of characters...

Re:Near death != death (0, Redundant)

Gat0r30y (957941) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968399)

Whoo-hoo-hoo, look who knows so much. It just so happens that your friend here is only MOSTLY dead. There's a big difference between mostly dead and all dead. Mostly dead is slightly alive. With all dead, well, with all dead there's usually only one thing you can do.

Re:Near death != death (1)

Krneki (1192201) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968543)

How about hibernation?

Re:Near death != death (5, Funny)

dingen (958134) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968663)

You're either dead or you're not. It's rather binary. There's no continuum.

There's no "rather binary". It's either binary or it's not.

Re:Near death != death (5, Funny)

Emperor Zombie (1082033) | more than 5 years ago | (#25969123)

Sure there is! It's just like regular binary, except it only uses the numbers "one-ish" and "probably nothing".

Re:Near death != death (1)

wolfsdaughter (1081205) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968827)

it's only binary if you define 'dead' as the point in which an organism is no longer capable of life sometimes things that "look" dead become alive again... so how do you determine when irrevocable death occurs?

Re:Near death != death (3, Insightful)

Carnildo (712617) | more than 5 years ago | (#25969017)

You're either dead or you're not. It's rather binary. There's no continuum.

The people quoting The Princess Bride above do have a point: you can't draw a line and say "everyone on this side is dead, everyone on the other side is alive". Consider bacterial endospores: no significant chemical reactions are taking place inside the spore, and by most objective measures, they're "dead". But place one in the correct environment, and it will convert to an unambiguously-alive bacterium.

Humans are far more complicated, with even more ways to blur the boundary between "alive" and "dead".

Re:Near death != death (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25969033)

...and the undead?

(i'd like to think that would be -1 in binary)

Re:Near death != death (1)

glidermike (1062790) | more than 5 years ago | (#25969083)

unfortunately parts of me have been dead for a few years now

Death is not a state. It's a prognosis. (4, Interesting)

Ungrounded Lightning (62228) | more than 5 years ago | (#25969159)

You're either dead or you're not.

Define death.

As the cryonicists say, "Death is not a state. It's a prognosis." It's a claim that the organism will not be restored from its current state to a level of function that is considered alive.

Last time I looked (which was a while ago) trauma centers were regularly reviving victims who drowned in cold water and had been "dead" for half an hour. Surgeons were taking advantage of this by precooling patients who needed surgery that would leave the brain without blood flow for similar times. And research labs had perfused a dog with suitable protective substances, stopped its heart, cooled its body to freezing temperatures, left it that way for some time, then revived it. (And this guy has improved on that using H2S.)

Were the drowning victims "dead"? Was the dog?

There are people who are long since frozen - in full body or brain only - in the hope that they can some day be repaired (or built into a fresh body). If that is successful, are those people now "dead"? Or are they just resting at liquid nitrogen temperatures?

Holy moly! (5, Funny)

grub (11606) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968299)


Quick, get him CVS commit access to all the BSD projects!

Re:Holy moly! (2, Funny)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968353)

Too late. I think Microsoft already hired him to do a service pack for Vista.

Sign me up! (2, Funny)

hamburgler007 (1420537) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968319)

and... "Thaw me out when robot wives are cheap and effective. PS - please alter my pants as fashion dictates."

Re:Sign me up! (1)

sexconker (1179573) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968609)

Me and Frostilicus go way back.

37 degrees (0)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968335)

just as we live at 37 degrees.

Only in the USA and UK. Everywhere else, you'd be too hot to call it living.

Re:37 degrees (2, Informative)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968393)

Only in the USA and UK. Everywhere else, you'd be too hot to call it living.

37 deg C = 98.6 deg F. IOW, normal human body temperature. Or did I just do a whooosh?

Re:37 degrees (1)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968501)

I think I just wooshed all over myself.

That should have been:

"Except in the USA and UK, where you'd be freezing to death."

Re:37 degrees (1)

sexconker (1179573) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968625)

GP self-wooshed.
Wooshturbation?

Re:37 degrees (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25968675)

I think you're the only poster so far that clued in the scientist was referring to both Celcius *and* body temperature. You win the thread.

Geez, haven't you nerds ever had a thermometer stuck in you? I won't ask where.
But yes, they obviously haven't had children with colds.

Burning the life at both ends. (2, Insightful)

Ostracus (1354233) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968345)

"We're almost dead already! So what if we turn down the candle's need for oxygen? What if we dim the candle so much that we don't even have the energy to die?'"

And what kind of "life" would it be?

Re:Burning the life at both ends. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25968979)

And what kind of "life" would it be?

I dunno, but I bet this guy [slashdot.org] knows.

Re:Burning the life at both ends. (3, Funny)

denzacar (181829) | more than 5 years ago | (#25969107)

One where you could sleep over the economic crisis.

Or get to live to eventually play Duke Nukem Forever.

hey totally lost me... (1, Insightful)

ArcSecond (534786) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968365)

...when he wrote "It's a weird thing about scientists--you would think that they would love science fiction. But they don't."
If you'll excuse my French: bullshit!

Re:hey totally lost me... (1)

philspear (1142299) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968673)

If you'll excuse my French: bullshit!

I would, but that's not french.

Re:hey totally lost me... (1)

ArcSecond (534786) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968845)

sure it is!... if you say it right. :)

Re:hey totally lost me... (1)

mooingyak (720677) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968905)

It must be French, the OP is much too polite for what that word sounds like in English.

This needed for long space travel but warp / hype (3, Funny)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968373)

This needed for long space travel but warp / hyper drives are better.

Re:This needed for long space travel but warp / hy (2, Funny)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968753)

This needed for long space travel but warp / hyper drives are better.

Sorry to rain on your party but we are never going to have a warp or hyper drive. They were designed around the scheduling of TV advertisements, not the laws of physics.

Re:This needed for long space travel but warp / hy (2, Insightful)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968949)

Most every space science fiction has a period where people went out in "sleeper ships" to colonize the galaxy.. and then the warp drives come along and overtake the sleeper ships. It's a common theme.

I imagine the following for us:

* All those exoplanet astronomers eventually discover a rocky planet around an nearby star.. say, 20 light years away.
* They manage to confirm the atmosphere is oxygen/nitrogen, and can guess that the atmospheric pressure is similar to Earth.
* Some smart cookie figures out how to image the surface of the planet and sees trees and rivers and, ya know, squirrels.
* A Von Braun figure declares that we *must* go populate this planet and puts together enough international funding to send a ship.

The ship would be nuclear powered. It would have about 30,000 people on it in suspended animation. 30 engineers would remain awake to monitor the systems and keep the ship on course. After 10 years of service, they'd go into suspended animation and wake their successors (actually, it'd be staggered replacement). If it takes 400 years to get there, so what? That's just 40 shifts. 1,200 engineers out of 30,000 colonists.

Re:This needed for long space travel but warp / hy (1)

goose-incarnated (1145029) | more than 5 years ago | (#25969093)

1,200 engineers out of 30,000 colonists.

Not on 'B' Ark

EPZ.. (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25968381)

includes where you there are about 700 and theB st8iking prima donnas to

Hoax (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25968429)

"Esquire is running a a jaw-dropping profile of MacArthur genius Marc Roth in their annual Best and Brightest roundup, detailing how this gonzo DNA scientist (who also figured out how to diagnose lupus correctly)" I stopped reading right there. It's never Lupus.

37 degrees? (1)

citylivin (1250770) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968453)

"But we live on 21 percent oxygen, just as we live at 37 degrees."

Im pretty sure the average comfort zone of humans is between 15 and 25 degrees. I find it odd that they picked such a high number. Are they trying to set the upper bound of human tolerance or something?

Re:37 degrees? (1)

xarius76 (826419) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968505)

"But we live on 21 percent oxygen, just as we live at 37 degrees."

Im pretty sure the average comfort zone of humans is between 15 and 25 degrees. I find it odd that they picked such a high number. Are they trying to set the upper bound of human tolerance or something?

37 degrees Celsius = 98.6 degrees Fahrenheit

Re:37 degrees? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25969051)

37 degrees is not random, 37 degrees it the internal body temperature of humans and the temperature at which peak performance is achieved in most life.(Biogas generators are operated at). Yes we prefer to be in surrounding temperaturs of 15 to 25 degrees, but what he meant was internal temperature. The guy clearly hasn't got a strong grasp of the English language, and worryingly chemistry. Oxygen doesnt burn, we use oxygen in respiration, and we 'burn' food.

Deanimation? (0)

Tumbleweed (3706) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968467)

Am I the only one who had a Tron flashback and read that as 'deresolution'?

Hatian witch doctors have been doing this for year (2, Interesting)

Brigadier (12956) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968485)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fugu [wikipedia.org] search zombie

Re:Hatian witch doctors have been doing this for y (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25968843)

The pufferfish is also reported to be one of the main ingredients used in voodoo to turn people into zombies. According to ethnobotanist Wade Davis, the pufferfish is the key ingredient in the first step of creating a zombie, where the tetrodotoxin creates a death-like state. In the second step, hallucinogens are used to hold the person in a will-less zombie state. There was considerable skepticism to Davis's claims; he was widely accused of fraud, and there has been no final statement as to the veracity of his findings.[3]

If even Wikipedia doubts you, your doing it wrong.

Aging is a disease (5, Insightful)

geekoid (135745) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968497)

that will be cured.

And no, overpopulation won't be a problem becasue humans, like all biological creatures will only expand to meet the amount of food that is available.
The rest will starve.

Re:Aging is a disease (5, Funny)

josteos (455905) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968681)

The rest will starve.

Until the hungry ones realize the others taste good with ketchup.

Re:Aging is a disease (1)

pgn674 (995941) | more than 5 years ago | (#25969165)

The rest will starve.

Until the hungry ones realize the others taste good with ketchup.

Mmm, Soylent Green with red ketchup. It's like a Christmas meal with half your family being the meal.

Re:Aging is a disease (1)

BountyX (1227176) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968709)

I've been trying to tell these mortals that for quite some time now...

Re:Aging is a disease (1)

TooMuchToDo (882796) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968785)

I think overpopulation won't be a problem because reproduction will either a) require permits of some sort, to keep overpopulation from occuring or b) people would rather enjoy their life than having kids. The latter is happening already in most first-world countries, as their birth rates are dropping below replacement rate (the US varies a bit, because immigration is a big part of the replacement rate).

Re:Aging is a disease (1)

servognome (738846) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968801)

And no, overpopulation won't be a problem becasue humans, like all biological creatures will only expand to meet the amount of food that is available. The rest will starve.

Typically when overpopulation is used in terms of humans, it has more to do with the social issues rather than survival. Overpopulation can cause life to be hell well before the food runs out.

Re:Aging is a disease (1)

Adrian Lopez (2615) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968835)

And no, overpopulation won't be a problem becasue humans, like all biological creatures will only expand to meet the amount of food that is available. The rest will starve.

*blink*
*blink*

Um...

*blink*
*blink*

Starving or dying for lack of sufficient resources is the very criterion by which we determine overpopulation has occurred.

Re:Aging is a disease (1, Interesting)

girlintraining (1395911) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968959)

overpopulation won't be a problem becasue humans, like all biological creatures will only expand to meet the amount of food that is available.

Overpopulation isn't a problem after the ones who starved are dead, you are correct sir. But if nobody is dying anymore than no new people are arriving to take their place. No more evolution.

For my part, I think one lifetime is enough for me. There's some tricks in life that are only meant to be seen once. I don't believe in a heaven or a hell, but even if they cured aging tomorrow, I wouldn't take it. Let someone take my place when I've had my fill, I'm not greedy. I don't want to live forever, just to live long enough to prove out this childish hope I've had that life could be more than this.

Re:Aging is a disease (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25969167)

> Let someone take my place when I've had my fill,
> I'm not greedy. I don't want to live forever,
> just to live long enough to prove out this
> childish hope I've had that life could be more than this.
>
You may find yourself saying the same thing at age 200...

Re:Aging is a disease (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25969013)

Unless, in the ruckus of the food riots, someone lets off a nuke.

Re:Aging is a disease (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25969071)

And the number who starve would not exceed the number who would have died otherwise. Especially given that birth rates are declining with death rates.

Re:Aging is a disease (2, Insightful)

justinlee37 (993373) | more than 5 years ago | (#25969145)

I think that most people suggesting that there will be an overpopulation problem are starting with the inherent assumption that starvation/overcrowding/war would be the problem. So basically you've just said that the problem won't be a problem. Brilliant.

Practical applications (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25968619)

It's been the holly grail for many reasons. Say you have a heart transplant patient that has less than a day to live and is waiting on a new heart. Even a few days would increase radically their chance of survival. It could potentially be extended to organs themselves. Imagine warehousing organs until needed. It's not just handy for extreme things like space travel there are more practical uses.

Vegetables (1)

kieblerh (1414625) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968669)

Zombies that cant move sound like vegetables and they arent very fun at all.

Obligatory Futurama Quote (1)

srobert (4099) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968749)

"Who would have known playing God could have such terrible consequences?"
                                                                                                                          Bender Bending Rodriguez

What about plants? (1)

nextekcarl (1402899) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968777)

Not all life burns oxygen. Unless there's some chemistry I'm forgetting (certainly possible).

Re:What about plants? (1)

Carnildo (712617) | more than 5 years ago | (#25969117)

Plants require oxygen:

Inside chloroplasts: CO2 + H2O + sunlight => sugar
Inside the rest of the plant: sugar + O2 => energy

The reason plants have net oxygen production is that they also use sugar as a structural material, in the form of cellulose.

There are living things that don't use oxygen, but they tend to be single-celled organisms such as obligate anaerobes (sugar => alcohol + carbon dioxide + energy) or chemosynthetic bacteria (funky sulpher compounds => other funky sulpher compounds + energy).

Obligatory Frankenstein Quote (1)

srobert (4099) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968787)

Fire Bad! Aaaaaaagh!!

It's better to burn out Than to fade away (1)

Alien Being (18488) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968855)

My my, hey hey
Rock and roll is here to stay
It's better to burn out
Than to fade away
My my, hey hey.

Out of the blue and into the black
They give you this, but you pay for that
And once you're gone, you can never come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black.

The king is gone but he's not forgotten
This is the story of a Johnny Rotten
It's better to burn out than it is to rust
The king is gone but he's not forgotten.

Hey hey, my my
Rock and roll can never die
There's more to the picture
Than meets the eye.
Hey hey, my my.

Re:It's better to burn out Than to fade away (1)

Alien Being (18488) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968899)

It's just a song this article made me think of. Draw your own philosophical conclusions.

Reincarnating? (3, Funny)

grahamd0 (1129971) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968903)

Esquire is running a a jaw-dropping profile of MacArthur genius Marc Roth in their annual Best and Brightest roundup, detailing how this gonzo DNA scientist ... went from watching his infant daughter die to literally reincarnating animals.

I think they meant literally reanimating animals, but if I'm wrong, this guy's experiments would be interesting indeed.

!Reincarnate. !Resurrect. Suspended Animation. (1)

Khopesh (112447) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968933)

"Reincarnate" means To cause to be reborn in another body; incarnate again (ADHD, Dictionary.com) ... as in you die and the next thing you know, you're alive but in somebody else's body. The process in question here is actually "resurrecting," "raising," or, as TFA actually states, "bringing back" the dead, but only a clinical definition of "death" [wikipedia.org] that doesn't mean dead in the sense that they're not coming back. Only the HTML title of the article (and the slashdot post title) use this horribly flawed term.

Rather, this appears to be suspended animation, which frankly I find more interesting anyway. While you're suspended, you're clinically "dead," which is a state we can already induce with various toxins (supposedly, with intense meditation, yogis can do this as well).

Been doing it for years ... (1)

PPH (736903) | more than 5 years ago | (#25968947)

... with Alt-Ctrl-Del.

Not Dead... (4, Funny)

JaneTheIgnorantSlut (1265300) | more than 5 years ago | (#25969019)

Just pining for the fjords.

He's ALIVE! He's ALIVE! (1)

Neanderthal Ninny (1153369) | more than 5 years ago | (#25969021)

However bring back mice from a cryogenic state is different from a human. Also if anything that hasn't been preserved problem will be difficult to "deanimate" since all living things will start to decompose after you die so "deanimating" those will be near impossible since all the parts will be disintegrating.
Maybe he can try it on Ted Williams next...

Obligatory House reference (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25969063)

If this doesn't get tagged "itsnolupus", I'm leaving.

deja vu (1)

benjamin.haley (1085479) | more than 5 years ago | (#25969151)

has anyone seen pet cemetery...

Article has bad style (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25969189)

While this story was interesting, I felt like I was reading an 8th grader's essay.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>