4 ms·
There is a benefit to doing this kind of work on animals: significantly lower regulatory burden, with the option to convert that technology over to humans if it
by dnissley 4y ago
There is a benefit to doing this kind of work on animals: significantly lower regulatory burden, with the option to convert that technology over to humans if it works well enough. There's a similar startup, Loyal, doing work on dog life extension.
- A_D_E_P_T 4y agoAlright, granted. But, in that case, why not just do experiments in rats or rhesus monkeys, like everybody else? Instead of approaching the problem in a rigorous and scientific way, they're pitching a mirage of a product: A way to reunite, in the very distant future, pet owners with their recently deceased animals. In itself, the scientific value of this is minimal. You can apparently sign up for Cryopets with a pet snake, fish, or frog. It's extremely unlikely that such non-mammals are getting revived at all, and there's effectively no way that any techniques that might work on 'em would translate to humans. It's a grift because they're selling a product with < 0.0001% odds of successful delivery. (And I'm being generous here, 1-in-10000 probably considerably overstates their odds of success.) It doesn't look good.