The Skepticism Surrounding Cryonics: A Scientific Perspective

Despite the allure of the idea, scientists are generally skeptical about cryonics. The concept of freezing a legally dead body until future science can revive it remains a topic of extensive debate and criticism. While some believe it to be a speculative future possibility, the consensus among experts is that it is not yet a scientifically viable option.

Current Understanding and Challenges

Legally dead signifies the end of life as we know it; the body no longer has a functioning brain. Fast-freezing this legally dead body attempts to preserve it, but it also confirms the essence of death. Freezing a still-living person on their deathbed introduces significant challenges. The human body is predominantly made of water, and thawing this ice causes extensive cellular damage, especially to the brain cells, which are crucial for memory and identity.

The brain, composed of trillions of neurons interconnected in a complex web, is particularly fragile. Once the oxygen supply to the brain is stopped, these interconnections are irreversibly destroyed within minutes. These neural connections embody our memories and identity, distinguishing us not just from each other but even from our identical twins. Without a functional brain, a body in cryogenic storage is essentially no different from frozen meat. It retains none of the memories that once identified the person whose body was frozen.

Technological Challenges

Reviving a cryogenically frozen human is a daunting task. Current cryopreservation methods are insufficient to prevent cellular damage. Even if the freezing and thawing processes are perfected, restarting the heart might only produce a vegetative state, not the robust, conscious individual it once was. The brain stem, essential for maintaining basic bodily functions, must remain functional for a revived individual to survive. If this crucial part of the brain is damaged, it's highly unlikely to achieve even a partially conscious state.

Speculating on Future Possibilities

While the arguments against cryonics are strong, it's worth noting that any future breakthroughs could fundamentally change the landscape. However, the current state of knowledge and technology suggests that cryonics remains more in the realm of science fiction than viable science.

Others, like Franklin Veaux, point out that the brain is the core of our being, more than just a power supply. Other organs in the body, such as the heart, lungs, and kidneys, are mere mechanical devices that can be replaced. Yet, the brain is a colossal network of exclusively volatile memory with no backup. Attempting to restore such a complex and delicate structure to life after deep freezing is a significant technological hurdle.

Conclusion

Until substantial scientific advancements are made, the skepticism surrounding cryonics remains justified. The concept remains riddled with ethical, biological, and technological challenges. As our understanding of neuroscience and cryopreservation evolves, there may be a shift in perspective, but for now, it is seen as more of a speculative future possibility than a scientifically viable method of preserving life.