- John McCarthy’s 1990s essay “The Future of Human Evolution” was cited, asking why humans can only store ~5 minutes of oxygen while some animals store weeks or months, and proposing that dense chemical storage (e.g., hydrogen peroxide) plus a dedicated organ could extend this to days.  
- Participants contrasted McCarthy’s “steam-locomotive-grade” biomedical approach with the more futuristic respirocyte concept (Freitas, 1990s), arguing that near-term engineering might suffice without full nanotechnology.  
- Hemoglobin’s 500:1 mass overhead was highlighted as a key inefficiency; dense oxidizers such as H₂O₂ or solid “oxygen candles” could reduce total mass to the same order of magnitude as daily food intake.  
- Safety concerns were raised: high-test peroxide is corrosive/explosive, and co-locating strong oxidizers with biological fuel risks spontaneous combustion (bombardier beetles were given as a natural example that sometimes “cooks itself”).  
- CO₂ removal without breathing was discussed: a hypothetical “scrubber organ” using strong base and selective membranes could bind CO₂ until critical levels, though continuous operation would consume substrate.  
- Use-cases debated included deep-sea habitation, space travel, and emergency cardiac-arrest protection; one suggestion was to perfuse only the brain with stored O₂, letting the rest of the body tolerate transient hypoxia.  
- Practical comparisons were made to submarine and aircraft emergency systems (oxygen candles vs. peroxide generators), implying that existing chemical oxygen generator technology could be miniaturized for personal use.