Using the Dead as Fertilizer, Seriously

a reply to: BlackArrow

You know that is an interesting point, blame big pharma (getting farmers hooked on artificial fertilizers did not help) and unsustainable farming techniques for that, time to go back to the old crop rotation method perhaps at least were that is still possible.

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: bobs_uruncle

It's called a cemetery grove, or planting a tree for every cremated body. Forests instead of tombstones. Replacing the environment at the same rate people are dying.

Sounds equitable that way.

That's the thing, they make it sound wonderful, until we're eating our neighbours ffs.

originally posted by: ThatDamnDuckAgain
a reply to: Gothmog
Since the body is made out of water mostly, you would loose that.

about 50% is water in the human body, so you would loose about 40L if water per death that you can't replace.

Wait , what ?
To quote the original post I was responding to : "On a multi generation star ship with an enclosed environment"
Now , a rebuttal to your post :
1) Think how much water is CONSUMED by an individual to maintain that percentage in the body
(Hmm , don't need a 2)

a reply to: LABTECH767

By the time a multigenerational ship arrives anywhere, there will be an already established colony to greet them.

Say the ship 1 takes 100 years to make the journey. 10 to 20 years after launch, ships can be made to go twice as fast.

Ship 2 will get there say 65 years after the launch of ship 1. In 10 to 20 years after ship 2 launches, ships can go twice as fast as ship 2.

Ship 3 arrives at the destination say 50 years after ship 1 launched

This continues and the last ship launched gets there first. And no, they will not catch up with each other because they are all on separate courses to get to where there destination will be when the ships get there.

I don’t think they would need to use the crew for furtilizer because meat is a lot harder to compost than plants and 70% of animal bodies are water just like the planet. A crew of 100 for 100 years would only need less than 22,000 pounds of minerals, organic mater and trace elements to make the journey. There would be plenty of room for this on a ship for 100 people for 100 years.

There are some sick individuals among our leadership today .
No morality or feelings of honor whatsoever .

a reply to: beyondknowledge

Probably correct, unless it was a last ship out of the port before a disaster of some kind.

But you are absolutely correct, while they would be stuck in there mini world technology back on there originating world would potentially move forward and just perhaps someone would figure out a way to beat the speed of light after all.

Would they then save those people or leave them like a living museum and time capsule of an ongoing experiment?.

I toyed with trying to think up a way to sustain the human body during operations and the best I could come up with was to chill it to near or even below the freezing point of water while at the same time finding some way to stop the water forming ice crystals as it is those that damage cell membrane's and vacuoles both during the freezing stage and also during the defrosting stage.

Maybe using some kind of wave generation technology to deliver standing waves into the cell's of the body that would prevent ice from forming by keeping the water molecules vibrating even at low temperatures.

My thoughts were how could surgeons be given weeks instead of hour's to perform complex operations and possibly save lives but in the end being just a layman I could not think of a viable solution.

Still some form of suspended animation would be great as well, there is a ufo story were the guy went into a downed craft and was in there for a few moments at most but when he came out hours had passed as if it had some kind of time distortion affect related to it's drive system whatever that was.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: LABTECH767

we have a lot of heavy metals in our body's, fillings with mercury

When you say "a lot", are you talking grams? Several milligrams? How many ppm of mercury do you reckon a human body might contain?

Did they die after a rather large sushi binge?

a reply to: Gothmog

Absolutely true, sadly the leadership is one of those posts that attracts the corrupt powerful elite and they tend not to see the rest of humanity as anything other than a resource to exploit for votes and for there own personal power.

Not true of all but perhaps of more than we would care to dwell on.

a reply to: dandandat2

Hey that's right I forgot Sushi often has mercury in it.
sushi-guide.co.uk...

Hey if you want crazy the Romans used lead as food colouring as well as it being in a substance they loved to consume a sweet syrup made from boiled down grapes, grapes they boiled down in lead pots.

a reply to: Gothmog
Yes, on a multigenerational ship.

1) Think how much water is CONSUMED by an individual to maintain that percentage in the body

2-3L a day.

That amount would still be wasted If the person was born on the ship, the complete amount would be wasted just like I wrote. Sure the first generation would bring their water with them, that all does not change the fact that you would loose resources on a steady rate if you discard dead bodies into space.

I dislike the thought of drinking old friends on a multigenerational ship but we need different societal rules anyways, on a multi generational ship.

Plus all the minerals and what not, that you take in and do not excrement again because they stay in your body. That's all strapped away from that closed system. Plus you loose precious air every time you discard someone.

You didn't think this through.

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: bobs_uruncle

It's called a cemetery grove, or planting a tree for every cremated body. Forests instead of tombstones. Replacing the environment at the same rate people are dying.

Can we start with the politicians, big pHARMa execs, etc?

Cheers - Dave

I looked at the OP and have a few thoughts.

one.. as a practical matter this isnt as "sick" as it sounds.. in fact quite practical.
your in essence bio "cremating" the body into a state that helps kill any potential items in it and can be used as fertilizer to nourish plants. turning a sad time into something good.

two... this in essence what happens to your body if you dont preserve it with chemicals.
alot of animals die in nature of all sizes and we dont go ape over it

three.. IMO if your body is buried in a coffin filled with metals, petrochemicals, ect and a body filled with toxic preserving fluids.. isnt that "harmful to the environment"?
IMO seems a tad more dangerous than this process.


four.. i do understand the religious side of it and feel if you dont want to do it for that reason then no one should make you.. freedom baby.

five.. i can see the funeral industry going ape over this and try to stop it. When you realize (note alot of people in the industry are very nice and kind) that full funerals (from preparation to the grave site) cots TENS OF THOUSANDS of dollars and someone comes along with a CHEAP (almost free or could be) alternative they want to stop it fast
hell when you tell them you even just want a rental or cheap coffin they go ape #.



lastly

IMO if one wants to do this then by all means DO IT..
if my body (btw im DEAD so are not there in it) can help in another way , be donated to science or fertilizer im all for it..

one real fear i have is this becomes either mandatory or the "human fertilizer" becomes such a hot commodity that the trickle down (like suggested in organ donation) would be some care being denied because "it isnt cost effective vs use of body".

just some random things to consider

scrounger

a reply to: scrounger

We spread some of my Dad's ashes (heavy metals and all) in various places he loved. Most of them, in the ocean. I don't really mind if I eat a fish that might have eaten his ashes. In fact, that would be kind of nice.

None of him under his headstone, actually. But it's a good place to put flowers and think about him.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: scrounger

We spread some of my Dad's ashes (heavy metals and all) in various places he loved. Most of them, in the ocean. I don't really mind if I eat a fish that might have eaten his ashes. In fact, that would be kind of nice.

None of him under his headstone, actually. But it's a good place to put flowers and think about him.

well stated

scrounger

a reply to: LABTECH767

Thank-you for the education and history of human uses of poop.

Glad I didn't see your response until after Dinner.

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: LABTECH767

Thank-you for the education and history of human uses of poop.

Glad I didn't see your response until after Dinner.

at least it was factual and well written

not the usual CRAP you get thrown at you on social media



scrounger

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: scrounger

We spread some of my Dad's ashes (heavy metals and all) in various places he loved. Most of them, in the ocean. I don't really mind if I eat a fish that might have eaten his ashes. In fact, that would be kind of nice.

None of him under his headstone, actually. But it's a good place to put flowers and think about him.

I agree man.

Yous should remember your dad anyway you feel comfortable.

I just don't want my loved one's in the garden for every bite.

To each their own, if you do that's fine by me.

It just depends on how you do it.

Click me

It is a nice way to be remembered.

P

In Washington state a persons cadaver can be disposed of 3 different ways; burial, cremation and composting; which is when the cadaver is ground up for fertilizer and helps to renew the Earth.

Governor Inslee signed composting into law a few years ago.

Humans have a morbid fascination with the dead. So much so, that we've convinced ourselves that what we do with our dead is somehow normal and natural. There is nothing normal or natural about embalming dead bodies with chemicals to slow the process of decay and putting them in caskets and vaults also made to resist decay. Then we erect tombstones as markers and make laws to prevent anyone from vandalizing the vast graveyards that cover the planet.

Embalming, non-biodegradable caskets and vaults, as well as cemeteries should have been made illegal a long time ago. Composting and cremation should be the norm instead of the exception. Although burial could be an option in places such as regulated "human landfills" without chemicals or caskets so their body decays in short order.

No disrespect intended, but the way we dispose of our dead makes no earthly sense.