At 01:36 AM 5/27/99 +0200, den Otter <neosapient@geocities.com> wrote:
>> Actually, there was no guillotine in them. It was whole body.
>> At least, this was how it was in the English translation.
>>
>> But the concept should not be taken as a joke.
>
>No, in fact it might be a good thing to see if something like a
>(semi-)automatic perfusion/cooling machine couldn't be made
>already (within reasonable price limits). It would certainly
>help a lot if the initial phases of a cryotransport were simplified
>so that all you had to to is place the deceased in a capsule,
>and push a couple of buttons. The washout might require
>some extra human assistence (plugging in the tubes etc.),
>but external cooling (and perhaps internal as well, using the
>cryovent cooling/oxigenating system) could be easily automated.
>Saves everybody a lot of trouble, and looks really neat (the
>capsule, I mean).
With your statements above and Eugene response to them (no quoted), think about it in Lem's context. The point behind such a device was for those who might be far away from help. In _Fiasco_, the person who uses the cryo unit is doing it because he's lost and about to die.
They actually don't find him for a long time. Even at the time of his cryosuspension, they don't have the tech to revive him. It's just a gamble, but it pays off.
Now imagine you're far away from a suspension team and have a choice between dying or being put into a clunky cryo chamber. You might not worry as much about a lot of the damage a good perfusion can prevent because your options are limited.
Also, one could think of such a cryo unit as something which a suspension team could talk other people through using -- people who are on site, but don't have medical or suspension skills. That might be a different model than the self-cryosuspension one.
Cheers!
Daniel Ust