Blurring the Line Between Life and Death

[Wowbagger]

This topic might not be comfortable for all of you. But, I do find this sort of thing fascinating, myself.

I am looking for any and all examples that demonstrate a blurry line between the two states of "Life": "Alive" and "Dead"

And/Or:

Examples that blur the line between Living and Non-Living things.

You can feel free to define the terms "life", "non-life", "alive", "dead", etc. in any reasonable way you wish, since I suspect any attempt to conform the whole discussion to a specific set of definitions would be futile, here. (Supplying working definitions might help, but is optional, if it is clear enough in context.)

A few easy examples to jump start this process:

Most people do not consider viruses to be alive, but they could be said to "act" with many of the characteristics of life.

Prions are considered even less so, even though they could sometimes "act" as if they were, but using only protein segments (and no DNA).

Individual cells in an animal could remain alive, for some time, even if the animal is considered dead, in its overall state. If we model the animal as a "community of cells", we could define it as "partly dead".

And, what about those freakin' zombies?! They rise from the grave, and actively seek brains to eat, even though their bodies are almost entirely made of dead cells! Are they "alive" or are they "dead"?! I guess that one depends on who is making the movie.

(Strictly speaking, that last one was a joke, but seriously: If anyone could contribute ways in which zombies could be plausible (and, not in the p-zombie sense), that would be.... interesting.)

[Perpetual Student]

Most people do not consider viruses to be alive, but they could be said to "act" with many of the characteristics of life.

What are the arguments against viruses being alive? They reproduce (in their manner) and mutate. Can it not be claimed they also demonstrate metabolism?

[Harpyja]

Concerning zombies, there's actually a good bit of reading on the topic.

In the article 5 Scientific Reasons a Zombie Apocalypse is Actually Possible (http://www.cracked.com/article_15643_p2.html), they mention stem-cell reanimation as one of the possible non-viral non-bacterial ways to bring about the living dead. They posited that an individual could take a brain-dead patient and regrow the brain using stem cells (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6VKN-4GK1DST-7&_user=10&_coverDate=08%2F31%2F2005&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=10e57bbd002805551700b598b9811763). However, according to this lab (http://2000plus.mpg.de/e/90/article/) dedicated to reanimation research, the process of reanimation results in the cortex slowly dying off from the inside out. So you'd have the brain stem, but no cortex.

But what exactly is a zombie? According to Dictionary.com, a zombie is defined as "the body of a dead person given the semblance of life, but mute and will-less, by a supernatural force, usually for some evil purpose." If we ignore purpose and force and just look at the product, we have the body of a person who was pronounced medically dead that, at some point after being pronounced dead, is reanimated in some way in that it loses both the ability of speech and its own free will. So far, the reanimation procedure is the closest method that fits the definition.

[Dr Adequate]

The freezing and thawing of organisms, e.g. human embryos, raises some interesting qestions.

Are they alive when no biological processes are taking place? If not, are they dead?

[Perpetual Student]

Is a sperm alive?

[plumjam]

The freezing and thawing of organisms, e.g. human embryos, raises some interesting qestions.

Are they alive when no biological processes are taking place? If not, are they dead?

Does freezing them stop all activity completely? Or does it just slow it down enormously? In the way that freezing (I had assumed) just slows down the decomposition of dead organic matter rather than stops it altogether.
Maybe I'm wrong.. maybe it's just refrigeration that does that.
Just curious.

[athon]

Biotic and abiotic is a false dichotomy.

Dead and alive is more of a spectrum, I feel, where death refers to a system that no longer has the means to sustain its own functioning any more, and that functioning has abated.

Athon

[Wowbagger]

Biotic and abiotic is a false dichotomy.

Dead and alive is more of a spectrum, I agree, but I am hoping for specific examples to illustrate this.

[Dr Adequate]

Does freezing them stop all activity completely? Or does it just slow it down enormously? In the way that freezing (I had assumed) just slows down the decomposition of dead organic matter rather than stops it altogether.
Maybe I'm wrong.. maybe it's just refrigeration that does that.
Just curious. I'd say it stops it: without a liquid medium, what could all the bits and bobs in the cell do? Stuff has to be able to float around in the cell.

There's a news story here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4655035.stm) about the successful implantation and gestation of an embryo after thirteen years frozen.

[plumjam]

I'd say it stops it: without a liquid medium, what could all the bits and bobs in the cell do? Stuff has to be able to float around in the cell.

There's a news story here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4655035.stm) about the successful implantation and gestation of an embryo after thirteen years frozen.

Yes. Thanks for the response.

[Wowbagger]

Does anyone know of any specific studies where a bacterial agent was "killed" and then "brought back to life"? I coulda sworn I once read about one.

[plumjam]

Is a sperm alive?

This lot won't be for much longer.

[Cuddles]

What are the arguments against viruses being alive? They reproduce (in their manner) and mutate. Can it not be claimed they also demonstrate metabolism?

I've never understood this one either. The reason usually given is that viruses can't reproduce outside of a living cell, and therefore they're not alive because they're dependent on using resources from that cell. However, this really seems like complete nonsense. All living things are entirely dependent on their environment, it's just that viruses are smal and therefore live in a different environment.

For example, a human's environment is the surface of the Earth. A bacterium's environment is inside a human. A viruses environment is inside the cells of a human. Saying that a virus isn't alive because it can't go about its business if you take it out of the human's cell makes no more sense than saying a human isn't alive because it can't eat or reproduce if you dump it on the surface of the Moon (without a spacesuit or any other protection for those who want to be picky).

And before anyone tries saying that the difference is that the human contains the mechanisms to be able to do those things while the virus doesn't, that's the whole point. A virus doesn't need to code for its own method of reproduction, because that already exists in the environment it is evolved to live in. That would be the same as saying that humans can't eat because we need plants to produce food for us. Everything is wholy reliant on its environment to survive. Viruses just happen to be evolved for a different environment.

Edit: As for the OP, someone has already mentioned sperm, but what about fetuses? That seems one of the more obvious examples of something that no-one can agree about.

[quarky]

Fungal spore? Seeds? An apple?
Zombie triffads?

[TX50]

Many "Artificial Life" practitioners like to think that their creations are "alive"
in some respects.

[Wowbagger]

what about fetuses? That seems one of the more obvious examples of something that no-one can agree about.
And another question related to that:

It seems researchers are modeling fetuses as a type of tumor, nowadays.

When does a fetus cease being a tumor of the mother, and start being an individual life form?

[Ixion]

And another question related to that:

It seems researchers are modeling fetuses as a type of tumor, nowadays.

When does a fetus cease being a tumor of the mother, and start being an individual life form?

I wonder where that came from? :D

[Z]

I kind of wonder myself about conscious life versus automatic life. Too many people today walk around in a semi-zombie state, going through motions but not being aware of anything - even themselves. Half-alive, they seem to me. Empty, hollow, brain-dead things that don't want to wonder about the world around them, that have no curiosity beyond the next tabloid scandal they read...

But that's not quite what you're going for, methinks.

What about artificial 'life'? Programs, for example, that perform all the virtual functions that 'life' is supposed to perform, but in an electronic or mechanical fashion? Is the underlying program that brings your Spore creature 'to life' any different, metaphysically speaking, from the underlying laws of physics that bring Ed Asner to life?

[Ixion]

This could quickly relate to modes of consciousness such as coma. Terry Schiavo did not have higher brain function, yet, with a feeding tube, was kept alive. She was, in effect, a zombie.

[aggle-rithm]

What are the arguments against viruses being alive? They reproduce (in their manner) and mutate. Can it not be claimed they also demonstrate metabolism?

According to the show "Fringe", they have razor-sharp teeth and crawl around at frightening speeds.

[Z]

According to the show "Fringe", they have razor-sharp teeth and crawl around at frightening speeds.

That reminds me of a porn/horror movie I saw in my youth...

[aggle-rithm]

Something as simple as the "twilight sleep" anesthesia used during colonoscopies can blur the distinction between life and death. The experiences you had while under the influence of the drugs are lost forever, having failed to imprint themselves on your memory. That person you were during that time-slice is, for all intents and purposes, dead.

My sister is a nurse who administers this sort of anesthesia during colonoscopies and endoscopies. She mentioned once that some doctors are very rough with patients during the procedure on the theory that they won't remember the experience anyway, so it doesn't matter how you treat them.

I responded that the same would be true of a terminal patient...soon they will be dead and won't remember a thing, so why not abuse them to your heart's content? My sister agreed that the logic was exactly the same.

Others in the room quickly changed the subject.

[aggle-rithm]

Is the underlying program that brings your Spore creature 'to life' any different, metaphysically speaking, from the underlying laws of physics that bring Ed Asner to life?

...and is there any way to stop these underlying laws of physics?

[Z]

...and is there any way to stop these underlying laws of physics?

Or at least hack them.

At least that explains why I keep finding myself in a room with no doors, a faulty oven, a fridge, and no smoke alarm... :eye-poppi

[Wowbagger]

I wonder where that came from? :DI would love to give you full credit.

But, in all honesty: The subject also came up in an I-Con panel. That, and the concept of coaxing cancer cells to regenerate lost body parts. (Where would the disease end and the healing process begin?!)

I kind of wonder myself about conscious life versus automatic life. Too many people today walk around in a semi-zombie state, going through motions but not being aware of anything - even themselves. Half-alive, they seem to me. Empty, hollow, brain-dead things that don't want to wonder about the world around them, that have no curiosity beyond the next tabloid scandal they read... There could be different "levels" of conscious life: Some "higher" than others. But, perhaps it is not a ladder, either. Maybe types of consciousness could be modeled like a bush?

Is the underlying program that brings your Spore creature 'to life' any different, metaphysically speaking, from the underlying laws of physics that bring Ed Asner to life? I agree that A.L., in general, could beconsidered alive, according to how you define the word.

But, I also think Spore is a bad example. The computer-controlled creatures feature a more procedural-based (almost like "script-based" but more flexible in its state management, etc.) A.I., rather than truly complex-adaptive forms of A.I.

[Z]

I would love to give you full credit.

But, in all honesty: The subject also came up in an I-Con panel. That, and the concept of coaxing cancer cells to regenerate lost body parts. (Where would the disease end and the healing process begin?!)

There could be different "levels" of conscious life: Some "higher" than others. But, perhaps it is not a ladder, either. Maybe types of consciousness could be modeled like a bush?

I agree that A.L., in general, could beconsidered alive, according to how you define the word.

But, I also think Spore is a bad example. The computer-controlled creatures feature a more procedural-based (almost like "script-based" but more flexible in its state management, etc.) A.I., rather than truly complex-adaptive forms of A.I.

Well, yeah - it was really just a vague analogy. Spore creatures don't even seem to have will, after all.

[Ixion]

It doesn't bother me that you had seen it before. Honestly, the idea of a fetus mimicking a tumor has been kicked around for awhile, so it doesn't surprise me that interested parties may have heard of it before.

[quarky]

It would be cool if one month fetuses could be born and make it on their own immediately.
They'd be sort of human, but small and amphibious. They'd stay that size, and be carnivores of bugs.

Oops. Topic drift.

[Wowbagger]

Spore creatures don't even seem to have will, after all.Sure they do! They have Will Wright!!

:duck:

[Dr. Imago]

Something as simple as the "twilight sleep" anesthesia used during colonoscopies can blur the distinction between life and death. The experiences you had while...

As an anesthesiologist, I could speak at length to this comment... but, WADR, I think you're confusing concepts a little here... although I know what you're driving at.

Loss of consciousness and inability to lay-down memory is slightly different, IMHO, than "blurring the distinction between life and death". At no time during any routine anesthetic are you not "alive", in that your organs aren't preserved and functioning independently, especially as you describe your sister's technique.

The only instance where this may be true are during the times we induce cold total circulatory arrest techniques (for instance, during aortic arch repair) when there is no circulation going to the body and you are temporarily separated from cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). Literally, the patient could be considered "dead" for those few minutes that the CPB is switched off. However, we know that very slow cellular metabolism is still occurring and that, needless to say, we can revive patients from this condition.

Now, simply having patients amnestic for a minor procedure is an entirely different concept, which is often what "sedation nurses" (which, I'm assuming, is what your sister does as opposed to being a registered nurse anesthetist) do in colonoscopy clinics. The interesting thing is that patients will often chat with you and/or tell you funny stories that they cannot later remember doing. This is hardly a "blurred line" between life and death, again IMHO. It is no different, as you say, as going on a complete bender and drinking yourself to the point of amnesia.

~Dr. Imago

[Wowbagger]

On another forum, someone reminded me of a fish that completely dehydrates when its lake dries up, and then revives when it gets wet again, but we can't remember what it was called. Anyone know anything about it?

[aggle-rithm]

Now, simply having patients amnestic for a minor procedure is an entirely different concept, which is often what "sedation nurses" (which, I'm assuming, is what your sister does as opposed to being a registered nurse anesthetist) do in colonoscopy clinics. The interesting thing is that patients will often chat with you and/or tell you funny stories that they cannot later remember doing. This is hardly a "blurred line" between life and death, again IMHO. It is no different, as you say, as going on a complete bender and drinking yourself to the point of amnesia.

~Dr. Imago

I suppose what I'm talking about is more philosophical than physical. The thought that there can be, in effect, a discontinuity in your existence is a disturbing one to ponder.

[aggle-rithm]

On another forum, someone reminded me of a fish that completely dehydrates when its lake dries up, and then revives when it gets wet again, but we can't remember what it was called. Anyone know anything about it?

A lungfish does that. It doesn't completely dry up, but encapsulates itself in a mud ball with a little moisture in the middle.

ETA: Off-topic, but interesting: The lungfish might seem to be a transitional form between fish and land animals, but it is actually a very primitive form of fish. As modern fish evolved, their lungs turned into air sacs to provide boyancy.

[Dr. Imago]

I suppose what I'm talking about is more philosophical than physical. The thought that there can be, in effect, a discontinuity in your existence is a disturbing one to ponder.

But, this happens to us everday for 5-8 hours (on average) during the periods of non-REM sleep.

:)

~Dr. Imago

[macdoc]

Brain dead for 2 hours.....

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.07/posts.html?pg=4

[Wowbagger]

I think it is clear that nature, itself, does not provide any distinction between "alive" and "not alive". Humans do that.

(And, I suppose, for good reason!)

[Perpetual Student]

On another forum, someone reminded me of a fish that completely dehydrates when its lake dries up, and then revives when it gets wet again, but we can't remember what it was called. Anyone know anything about it?

"During winter months, when the water is cold, they (desert pupfish) become dormant, burrowing in the muddy bottom of their habitat."
See:LINK (http://www.desertusa.com/mar97/du_pupfish.html)

[Dr. Imago]

Brain dead for 2 hours.....

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.07/posts.html?pg=4

Yeah, there's a very fine line indeed between a breathing, roaming-around, functioning, "normal" animal... and bacon.

~Dr. Imago

[macdoc]

You can see how some have survived in very cold water for remarkable periods and been okay. That one in Vegas with the over turned jeep was incredible.

The particular hospital had a revival unit they had not tried and it worked.....can't find a link.

Oh here we go

No pulse, no heartbeat and body temperature 30 degrees below normal - hopeless situation?

Four year old Jimmy Tontlewicz was pulled from the freezing waters of Lake Michigan after disappearing under the ice for more than a half hour.

Thirty year old Murray Brown was found thirty minutes after his Jeep crashed upside down in a chilly creek near Las Vegas, Nevada.

Two and a half year old Michelle Funk was rescued from an icy river in Utah after being submerged for over an hour!

All survived!

Each case is a story of perseverance and medical ingenuity that will not only affect the patients and doctors, but will change medical history forever.


As neurosurgeon Julian Bailes likes to say, “There has never been a drug as protective as the cold. It’s harnessing the cold that’s the problem.” Dr. Bailes was one of the surgeons who revived Jimmy Tontlewicz. He is now helping develop a blood substitute which will enable surgeons to lower body temperatures and buy valuable time for operating on trauma victims with severe head injuries.

Fortunately for Murray Brown, his trauma center doctor, Larry Gentilello, is the inventor of the Continuous Arterial/Venous Rewarming Device, a machine designed specifically for reviving hypothermia patients. Murray was the first human to benefit from continuous arterial/venous rewarming.

Michelle Funk, may be the luckiest of all. No one else has ever drowned for over an hour and recovered. She was not only the first child, but also the first drowning victim to be revived using an extracorpeal rewarming technique pioneered by her ER doc, Robert Bulte, MD.
more

http://www.figure8films.tv/shows/cws.htm

You wonder how more might have been saved had we known......:confused:

[quarky]

Frankenstein type monsters used to blur the line in people's imaginations. The mummy, even more so. Dead, then alive. Jesus is another focal point of that phenomena. Gore is usually implicated. (Not Al; blood.)

There should be a horror movie wherein a dumb janitor is on his way to dump a bucket of aborted fetuses into the dumpster behind the clinic, and accidently spills a bottle of cleaning fluid into the bucket. The unborn fetuses would somehow congeal into a new life form, and emerge from the dumpster, hungry, and pissed.

I hope that wasn't off-topic.

[Wowbagger]

I hope that wasn't off-topic. Not if zombies were discussed in the opening post!