Alternative Burials

[Big Fitz]

I think it's ironic that "traditional" now equates to being pumped full of formaldehyde or phenol. Psychologically, I think we do it because people can't cope with the thought that we are all going to decay.

I like the notion of just burying people instead of embalming them.

Actually the embalming process is to allow enough time before decay starts disfiguring the body, allowing for a wake and funeral for viewing of the body.

There is also a second reason for embalming thanks to the great Victorian age fear of being buried alive. There were too many times that people were buried alive and recovered in the casket only to die of a worse death, asphyxiation. This theory was born up with evidence of exhumed bodies (for whatever reason) having clawed at the lid of their casket trying to get out. At first, they tried silly things like adding a bell and string to the coffins so if someone did recover, they could ring for help and receive a little air, long enough to survive and be rescued.

This is the basis for the second reason for embalming: making sure they're dead. You don't live long if you've had all your blood sucked out and then pumped full of preserving chemicals like formaldehyde.

But since there is no stopping entropy and decay, the process only lasts for about a week or so before it takes hold. And that's on top of the fact that Americans eat so much processed foods, their tissue is preserved against rot for up to a week on it's own.

 

[westwall]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e2PyeXRwhCE]YouTube - Monty Python- Architect Sketch[/ame]

 

[Big Fitz]

You really should take a look. It considers the environmental impacts of both burial and cremation - neither of which are good for the environment. And then outlines some different alternatives, like 'eco' burials (which I'm gonna find out more about because I quite like the look of those) as well as stuff like donating your body for research.

I found it fascinating.... it's not a long read and well worth it.

FWIW: Donating your body to medical science = you being a cadaver and you will still be embalmed, likely for a year before medical students start dissecting you, and then cremated at the end.

I think it's a selfless thing to do and am not disparaging it. However, if embalming and cremation are not eco friendly and that is your main concern, then you should probably consider other things.

I didn't say I was gonna donate my body. If I did, it would be to the body farm, not medical research.

I guess reading the actual article is above the intellectual paygrade of some.

Another thing many people are finding when they want to donate their body is that there are so many available bodies right now thanks to poor and the anonymous dying, they will often only accept donations if you have something wrong with you to advance research.

And often the poor or homeless who die are in better condition than we plump suburbanites and that makes it easier for teaching.

 

[California Girl]

FWIW: Donating your body to medical science = you being a cadaver and you will still be embalmed, likely for a year before medical students start dissecting you, and then cremated at the end.

I think it's a selfless thing to do and am not disparaging it. However, if embalming and cremation are not eco friendly and that is your main concern, then you should probably consider other things.

I didn't say I was gonna donate my body. If I did, it would be to the body farm, not medical research.

I guess reading the actual article is above the intellectual paygrade of some.

Good Lord, who pissed in your fucking Wheaties?

I did read the entire article. That was a general "you" not a specific one. What you do with your body is your business, I have no interest in being involved in that decision.

My point was that cadavers are both embalmed and cremated so it's not really "eco-friendly". It's a selfless thing to do, but as far as what the article considers to be hard on the environment, it's a twofer.

My impression is that it's about 'alternatives', things other than the shit that does serious damage to the environment. While medical research may mean embalming, and not be particularly great for the environment, it does help with advances in medicine so that's a good thing.

I personally would lean towards either the eco burial or donating my remains to a body farm. Both of which would suit me as an individual.

 

[Big Fitz]

Live Organ Donation

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aclS1pGHp8o]YouTube - Organ Donor[/ame]

 

[California Girl]

FWIW: Donating your body to medical science = you being a cadaver and you will still be embalmed, likely for a year before medical students start dissecting you, and then cremated at the end.

I think it's a selfless thing to do and am not disparaging it. However, if embalming and cremation are not eco friendly and that is your main concern, then you should probably consider other things.

I didn't say I was gonna donate my body. If I did, it would be to the body farm, not medical research.

I guess reading the actual article is above the intellectual paygrade of some.

Another thing many people are finding when they want to donate their body is that there are so many available bodies right now thanks to poor and the anonymous dying, they will often only accept donations if you have something wrong with you to advance research.

And often the poor or homeless who die are in better condition than we plump suburbanites and that makes it easier for teaching.

I just think the whole subject, being one we don't really consider until the time comes, and - by then - it's often a tad late to consider the alternatives, I liked the article. It's started a debate in my family..... most of us like the idea of an eco burial.

 

[geauxtohell]

I didn't say I was gonna donate my body. If I did, it would be to the body farm, not medical research.

I guess reading the actual article is above the intellectual paygrade of some.

Good Lord, who pissed in your fucking Wheaties?

I did read the entire article. That was a general "you" not a specific one. What you do with your body is your business, I have no interest in being involved in that decision.

My point was that cadavers are both embalmed and cremated so it's not really "eco-friendly". It's a selfless thing to do, but as far as what the article considers to be hard on the environment, it's a twofer.

My impression is that it's about 'alternatives', things other than the shit that does serious damage to the environment. While medical research may mean embalming, and not be particularly great for the environment, it does help with advances in medicine so that's a good thing.

I personally would lean towards either the eco burial or donating my remains to a body farm. Both of which would suit me as an individual.

I agree, that is why I said: "If eco friendly is your main concern". I would hope people would continue to donate their bodies to medical science.

I would personally prefer an eco burial, but pragmatically my family is all buried in the same place that has all the usual requirements so if I die anytime soon, that's where I would go.

 

[geauxtohell]

Actually the embalming process is to allow enough time before decay starts disfiguring the body, allowing for a wake and funeral for viewing of the body.

I realize that. Of course, if we didn't wait three days to bury people or put them in a freezer, I would think it would be the sme.

There is also a second reason for embalming thanks to the great Victorian age fear of being buried alive. There were too many times that people were buried alive and recovered in the casket only to die of a worse death, asphyxiation. This theory was born up with evidence of exhumed bodies (for whatever reason) having clawed at the lid of their casket trying to get out. At first, they tried silly things like adding a bell and string to the coffins so if someone did recover, they could ring for help and receive a little air, long enough to survive and be rescued.

This is the basis for the second reason for embalming: making sure they're dead. You don't live long if you've had all your blood sucked out and then pumped full of preserving chemicals like formaldehyde.

But since there is no stopping entropy and decay, the process only lasts for about a week or so before it takes hold. And that's on top of the fact that Americans eat so much processed foods, their tissue is preserved against rot for up to a week on it's own.

Yeah, I remember reading stories about this i.e. "The Premature Burial". That was also the logic behind a "wake". Give someone three days to see if they "wake" up. If not, you can assume they are really dead and bury them.

My Great Grandfather was at a wake once, way back in the day, and he was the only person up watching the body and rigor mortis sat in and the body sat up. He said he shot out the door like a cannon.

 

[Big Fitz]

Actually the embalming process is to allow enough time before decay starts disfiguring the body, allowing for a wake and funeral for viewing of the body.

I realize that. Of course, if we didn't wait three days to bury people or put them in a freezer, I would think it would be the sme.

There is also a second reason for embalming thanks to the great Victorian age fear of being buried alive. There were too many times that people were buried alive and recovered in the casket only to die of a worse death, asphyxiation. This theory was born up with evidence of exhumed bodies (for whatever reason) having clawed at the lid of their casket trying to get out. At first, they tried silly things like adding a bell and string to the coffins so if someone did recover, they could ring for help and receive a little air, long enough to survive and be rescued.

This is the basis for the second reason for embalming: making sure they're dead. You don't live long if you've had all your blood sucked out and then pumped full of preserving chemicals like formaldehyde.

But since there is no stopping entropy and decay, the process only lasts for about a week or so before it takes hold. And that's on top of the fact that Americans eat so much processed foods, their tissue is preserved against rot for up to a week on it's own.

Yeah, I remember reading stories about this i.e. "The Premature Burial". That was also the logic behind a "wake". Give someone three days to see if they "wake" up. If not, you can assume they are really dead and bury them.

My Great Grandfather was at a wake once, way back in the day, and he was the only person up watching the body and rigor mortis sat in and the body sat up. He said he shot out the door like a cannon.

LOL... my sympathies, and I'd have done the exact same.

 

[geauxtohell]

Actually the embalming process is to allow enough time before decay starts disfiguring the body, allowing for a wake and funeral for viewing of the body.

I realize that. Of course, if we didn't wait three days to bury people or put them in a freezer, I would think it would be the sme.

There is also a second reason for embalming thanks to the great Victorian age fear of being buried alive. There were too many times that people were buried alive and recovered in the casket only to die of a worse death, asphyxiation. This theory was born up with evidence of exhumed bodies (for whatever reason) having clawed at the lid of their casket trying to get out. At first, they tried silly things like adding a bell and string to the coffins so if someone did recover, they could ring for help and receive a little air, long enough to survive and be rescued.

This is the basis for the second reason for embalming: making sure they're dead. You don't live long if you've had all your blood sucked out and then pumped full of preserving chemicals like formaldehyde.

But since there is no stopping entropy and decay, the process only lasts for about a week or so before it takes hold. And that's on top of the fact that Americans eat so much processed foods, their tissue is preserved against rot for up to a week on it's own.

Yeah, I remember reading stories about this i.e. "The Premature Burial". That was also the logic behind a "wake". Give someone three days to see if they "wake" up. If not, you can assume they are really dead and bury them.

My Great Grandfather was at a wake once, way back in the day, and he was the only person up watching the body and rigor mortis sat in and the body sat up. He said he shot out the door like a cannon.

LOL... my sympathies, and I'd have done the exact same.

Though as I think about it medically, it seems a little absurd. That's not really how rigor mortis works (cause spontaneous muscle flexion). It's probably one of those folk tales that's been passed down and is 10% true.

 

[California Girl]

I realize that. Of course, if we didn't wait three days to bury people or put them in a freezer, I would think it would be the sme.



Yeah, I remember reading stories about this i.e. "The Premature Burial". That was also the logic behind a "wake". Give someone three days to see if they "wake" up. If not, you can assume they are really dead and bury them.

My Great Grandfather was at a wake once, way back in the day, and he was the only person up watching the body and rigor mortis sat in and the body sat up. He said he shot out the door like a cannon.

LOL... my sympathies, and I'd have done the exact same.

Though as I think about it medically, it seems a little absurd. That's not really how rigor mortis works (cause spontaneous muscle flexion). It's probably one of those folk tales that's been passed down and is 10% true.

A friend of mine is a police officer. He likes to tell the story of a colleague of his who had to go to the morgue to check the details of a corpse. He pulled the body drawer open and the corpse sat up. He ran like the devil himself was after him.

How true that is, I don't know. I'm skeptical about it but it's a funny thought.

 

[geauxtohell]

LOL... my sympathies, and I'd have done the exact same.

Though as I think about it medically, it seems a little absurd. That's not really how rigor mortis works (cause spontaneous muscle flexion). It's probably one of those folk tales that's been passed down and is 10% true.

A friend of mine is a police officer. He likes to tell the story of a colleague of his who had to go to the morgue to check the details of a corpse. He pulled the body drawer open and the corpse sat up. He ran like the devil himself was after him.

How true that is, I don't know. I'm skeptical about it but it's a funny thought.

It might be true. Maybe the person died in the seated position, rigor sat in and they flattened them out for the locker and they resumed the rigor position when the straps were let up. That would make sense.

My uncle is a pathologist, so he's a little morbid. In Medical School they wanted to play a trick on one of their classmates, so they went to the morgue and took her cadaver out and my uncle got in. When she opened the locker, he sat up and she was so scared she punched him in the face. He just said he was glad she hit him with her right, because her left hand had a scalpel.

 

[Phoenix]

It might be true. Maybe the person died in the seated position, rigor sat in and they flattened them out for the locker and they resumed the rigor position when the straps were let up. That would make sense.

My uncle is a pathologist, so he's a little morbid. In Medical School they wanted to play a trick on one of their classmates, so they went to the morgue and took her cadaver out and my uncle got in. When she opened the locker, he sat up and she was so scared she punched him in the face. He just said he was glad shit hit him with her right, because her left hand had a scalpel.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0FJNZyhRfA4]YouTube - Ray Stevens Sittin' Up With The Dead[/ame]

 

[geauxtohell]

It might be true. Maybe the person died in the seated position, rigor sat in and they flattened them out for the locker and they resumed the rigor position when the straps were let up. That would make sense.

My uncle is a pathologist, so he's a little morbid. In Medical School they wanted to play a trick on one of their classmates, so they went to the morgue and took her cadaver out and my uncle got in. When she opened the locker, he sat up and she was so scared she punched him in the face. He just said he was glad shit hit him with her right, because her left hand had a scalpel.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0FJNZyhRfA4]YouTube - Ray Stevens Sittin' Up With The Dead[/ame]

LMAO. I think I just found the root of the folk tale. I think I'll keep it to myself. What's the point in ruining a good story?

No one likes that guy.

 

[Dabs]

This is what put me off the cremation side, although as I said, Catholics don't really do cremation but....Each cremation uses enough energy to travel 4,800 miles. Annually, in the US alone, that’s 83 trips to the moon… and back!

Even ignoring the mercury release, that's a vast amount of energy wasted.

My family are considering the 'eco' burials thing. We quite like that idea.

I completely understand your feelings.
But about that 83 trips to the moon and back thingie.....hell, I don't even plan on going to the moon once, let alone 83 times!
So I'm sticking with cremation

Yea, you're kinda missing the whole 'point' thing with this but it's your conscience so no biggie to me. Selfish behavior throughout life, selfish behavior in death... you go for it.
Personally, I'm thinking an 'eco' burial.... no coffin, no headstone, no damage to the planet will work for me and mine.

I got your point, but I was simply trying to add a little humor in with my answer.
I don't see how my answer was being selfish in any way.....and my cremation and your "eco" burial, are somewhat the same....no casket to buy, no headstone, no earth to dig up, etc.

 

[California Girl]

I completely understand your feelings.
But about that 83 trips to the moon and back thingie.....hell, I don't even plan on going to the moon once, let alone 83 times!
So I'm sticking with cremation

Yea, you're kinda missing the whole 'point' thing with this but it's your conscience so no biggie to me. Selfish behavior throughout life, selfish behavior in death... you go for it.
Personally, I'm thinking an 'eco' burial.... no coffin, no headstone, no damage to the planet will work for me and mine.

I got your point, but I was simply trying to add a little humor in with my answer.
I don't see how my answer was being selfish in any way.....and my cremation and your "eco" burial, are somewhat the same....no casket to buy, no headstone, no earth to dig up, etc.

It's not the same. Your cremation is bad for the environment. It costs us energy. That's bad. Choose it if you wish, but do so by accepting the damage you do.

 

[Dabs]

Yea, you're kinda missing the whole 'point' thing with this but it's your conscience so no biggie to me. Selfish behavior throughout life, selfish behavior in death... you go for it.
Personally, I'm thinking an 'eco' burial.... no coffin, no headstone, no damage to the planet will work for me and mine.

I got your point, but I was simply trying to add a little humor in with my answer.
I don't see how my answer was being selfish in any way.....and my cremation and your "eco" burial, are somewhat the same....no casket to buy, no headstone, no earth to dig up, etc.

It's not the same. Your cremation is bad for the environment. It costs us energy. That's bad. Choose it if you wish, but do so by accepting the damage you do.

Okie dokie, will do

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

I was reading this article and it occurred to me that I've never really given any thought to the downside of dying, or as the author puts it 'how to die without killing the planet' (I thought that was pretty funny).

I quite like the alternatives rather than traditional burials or cremation. Some of the facts in that article are quite depressing reading.... like the facts about cemeteries and the impact of cremations!! Wow, I soooo did not know this stuff.

Have a read and consider the options. Which of the options outlined in the article would you choose? Do you care about the damage to the planet that you cause by dying, you selfish SOBs?

corpsed = car fuel.
you get a cheque