4 ms·

Without reading the article we can safely say absolutely nothing in regard to the future of DIY science as we still don't have an autopsy report. So until then,

Without reading the article we can safely say absolutely nothing in regard to the future of DIY science as we still don't have an autopsy report. So until then, let's stop speculating.

RIMR 9y ago
I too look forward to seeing the autopsy report, but I am not too hopeful that this was just a coincidence. Having an otherwise healthy person perform high-risk experiments on his own body and then drop dead before hitting 30 doesn't leave a whole lot to the imagination. Obviously, the autopsy will tell us everything we need to know, but let's not pretend that his biohacking didn't play a role in his demise, because it seems highly likely that it did.
- bhickey 9y ago
  > but let's not pretend that his biohacking didn't play a role in his demise, because it seems highly likely that it did. I'm not trying to give you a hard time, but you should cut it out with the ridiculous and baseless speculation. He was found dead in an immersion tank. What sounds more likely: death from biohacking, death from drowning after blacking out?
  - scj 9y ago
    It is like asking if a person with a history of heart attacks died because they crashed their car, or if the car crashed because they had a heart attack behind the wheel. I'd wait for the autopsy.
    - bhickey 9y ago
      No, it really isn't at all. It's like asking if a person with a history of peanut allergies died because they got shot in the face or because the bullet was dipped in peanut butter.
      - scj 9y ago
        We may be speaking with asymmetric knowledge. Do you know his medical history? In particular, the experiments he's carried out on himself? I am operating under the assumption that while he liked attention, it is entirely possible he did something significant/relevant without public disclosure (possibly around the same time as his death).
- ars 9y ago
  > Obviously, the autopsy will tell us everything we need to know That's not obvious at all. The autopsy could come back "inconclusive". They do, quite frequently. Not every cause of death leaves a marker behind.
  - VectorLock 9y ago
    And I think almost any result people will still attribute in some way to biohacking, unless they find a bullet in him. Even if he drowned people could still say he could have became unconscious because of something he injected himself with, and they wouldn't be wrong.
- MisterTea 9y ago
  > Having an otherwise healthy person perform high-risk experiments on his own body and then drop dead before hitting 30 doesn't leave a whole lot to the imagination. It leaves a lot actually. There are plenty of stories of otherwise healthy young people dying from an array of ailments. It could have been an undiagnosed condition. It could have been drugs. Perhaps a freak accident in the tank. Or a combination. But until the autopsy results, stop speculating.
- LyndsySimon 9y ago
  > Having an otherwise healthy person perform high-risk experiments on his own body and then drop dead before hitting 30 doesn't leave a whole lot to the imagination. I'm not so sure about that. A quick glance at the SSA's actuarial table[0] shows that a male at age 20 has a ~1.3% chance on not seeing his 30th birthday. While intuitively it does seem likely that his experimentation contributed to this, it strikes me as likely that he had other compounding factors as well. For example - he died in a sensory deprivation tank. That's certainly not an activity that I would expect the general public to engage in, and I'm not familiar with its associated health risks. 0: https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html

Without reading the article we can safely say absolutely nothing in regard to the future of DIY science as we still don't have an autopsy report. So until then, let's stop speculating.

RIMR 9y ago

I too look forward to seeing the autopsy report, but I am not too hopeful that this was just a coincidence. Having an otherwise healthy person perform high-risk experiments on his own body and then drop dead before hitting 30 doesn't leave a whole lot to the imagination. Obviously, the autopsy will tell us everything we need to know, but let's not pretend that his biohacking didn't play a role in his demise, because it seems highly likely that it did.

bhickey 9y ago
> but let's not pretend that his biohacking didn't play a role in his demise, because it seems highly likely that it did. I'm not trying to give you a hard time, but you should cut it out with the ridiculous and baseless speculation. He was found dead in an immersion tank. What sounds more likely: death from biohacking, death from drowning after blacking out?
- scj 9y ago
  It is like asking if a person with a history of heart attacks died because they crashed their car, or if the car crashed because they had a heart attack behind the wheel. I'd wait for the autopsy.
  - bhickey 9y ago
    No, it really isn't at all. It's like asking if a person with a history of peanut allergies died because they got shot in the face or because the bullet was dipped in peanut butter.
    - scj 9y ago
      We may be speaking with asymmetric knowledge. Do you know his medical history? In particular, the experiments he's carried out on himself? I am operating under the assumption that while he liked attention, it is entirely possible he did something significant/relevant without public disclosure (possibly around the same time as his death).
ars 9y ago
> Obviously, the autopsy will tell us everything we need to know That's not obvious at all. The autopsy could come back "inconclusive". They do, quite frequently. Not every cause of death leaves a marker behind.
- VectorLock 9y ago
  And I think almost any result people will still attribute in some way to biohacking, unless they find a bullet in him. Even if he drowned people could still say he could have became unconscious because of something he injected himself with, and they wouldn't be wrong.
MisterTea 9y ago
> Having an otherwise healthy person perform high-risk experiments on his own body and then drop dead before hitting 30 doesn't leave a whole lot to the imagination. It leaves a lot actually. There are plenty of stories of otherwise healthy young people dying from an array of ailments. It could have been an undiagnosed condition. It could have been drugs. Perhaps a freak accident in the tank. Or a combination. But until the autopsy results, stop speculating.
LyndsySimon 9y ago
> Having an otherwise healthy person perform high-risk experiments on his own body and then drop dead before hitting 30 doesn't leave a whole lot to the imagination. I'm not so sure about that. A quick glance at the SSA's actuarial table[0] shows that a male at age 20 has a ~1.3% chance on not seeing his 30th birthday. While intuitively it does seem likely that his experimentation contributed to this, it strikes me as likely that he had other compounding factors as well. For example - he died in a sensory deprivation tank. That's certainly not an activity that I would expect the general public to engage in, and I'm not familiar with its associated health risks. 0: https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html