X-Message-Number: 15637
From: 
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 12:54:54 EST
Subject: summary

The basic guidelines for CI adoption of procedures and explanation of 
procedures are as follows.

1. We pick the procedures or variants we think most promising in the context 
of our capabilities, try them out with dead-animal models, and have the 
results evaluated by independent professionals. We are then guided by those 
reports.

What we do not do is just make guesses based on the reports of other people, 
no matter how authoritative they may be. Neither do we add make-work or 
techno-babble complications to our procedures. Nor do we use medications or 
procedures that are illegal under the guidelines for prescription medications 
or medical/surgical procedures.

As an example of the latter, it is illegal in Michigan for anyone other than 
a licensed funeral director to cut or inject a dead person, with obvious 
exceptions for autopsies, medical schools, and mortuary colleges. That works 
out all right, because it is relatively easy to train a licensed mortician to 
do our work, and do it much less expensively than using a physician or 
veterinary surgeon.

We do not claim our procedures are the best possible, or even the best 
available. They are simply the best (as evaluated by independent 
professionals) of those we have tried. We will be trying many more in the 
future. 

The evaluations of our current procedure (5-step washout and perfusion) show 
very much better results than with untreated controls, although still 
significant damage. 

The treatment of the rabbit brain pieces studied by Dr. Pichugin et al was 
somewhat different, but still glycerol based and frozen (not vitrified) to 
liquid nitrogen temperature. They succeeded in obtaining integrated 
electrical activity in networks of neurons after rewarming, which we believe 
is significant and encouraging.

2. The information we provide about our work and procedures is primarily 
through our web site, which we try to improve on a non-stop basis. When we 
receive individual questions from prospective members, we try to answer them, 
balancing courtesy and the need for members against the expense of individual 
answers. 

In other words, questions are welcome, but answers will be at our discretion. 
Anyone can ask or say whatever he chooses, and we will respond as we choose. 
We will not be drawn into endless argumentation that promises no benefit. In 
general, we will not debate the merits of this or that procedure except with 
people we think can offer useful help, in private.

Some questions, of course, will not be considered at all, such as anything 
that might compromise privacy of our members and patients, or of our 
consultants. We will not expose our contract consultants to the possibility 
of demands for information by outsiders; they aren't paid enough for that. 

All of the cryonics organizations have their own individual and unique 
strengths or advantages. We believe they are all are run by conscientious 
people doing their best. Our web site has links to all the others, to make it 
easy for prospective members to decide what is best for themselves.   

3. Alcor procedures have been involved lately in some disagreements and 
misunderstandings. This is an important question for those trying to make a 
decision among organizations.

For the official Alcor version, we refer readers to the Alcor web site 
<alcor.org> or the current issue of their magazine, CRYONICS, Fred 
Chamberlain's article.

A couple of readers have complained that CI evaluations of experimental 
results have not used enough samples, or sufficiently varied samples, or a 
large enough number of electron microscope photos, etc. Well, we have done 
what we could afford to do, and results have been encouragingly consistent. 
The current Alcor procedure, however, as far as I know, has not been 
evaluated by anyone, anywhere, ever, by any criterion--not a single electron 
microscope photo, for example, from whole animal brains after treatment by 
the current Alcor method and after rewarming from liquid nitrogen temperature.

This does not mean their procedure is worthless. It doesn't even mean they 
are wrong in claiming a substantial improvement over their previous method. 
They could be right in thinking that--at least under ideal conditions--their 
current method is likely to produce vitrification (although also fracturing 
when storage is in liquid nitrogen). The Alcor people and their consultants 
are experienced and conscientious, and have made their best guess based on 
theory and indirect evidence. 

But the fact remains that their procedure is not only lacking in actual 
direct evaluation of results, but is also secret in some of its elements, 
including the composition of their CPA. I'm not even saying the secrecy is 
wrong; they doubtless feel the secrecy is necessary for proprietary or 
contractual reasons. Rather, I am saying two things:

First, we cannot test their procedure so long as it remains secret, and 
nobody else can provide independent verification. 

Second, it's a bit odd for some people to complain that CI does not publish 
every last trivial detail of its procedures, while not complaining about the 
fact that Alcor keeps some of the most important information strictly secret, 
and has not actually evaluated its results.

Probably in the next year the Alcor people or their consultants will evaluate 
results of their procedure, which will help, and perhaps their optimism will 
prove justified. And eventually we will know their CPA and other details, and 
will run our own tests. It will all work out, with only timing and expense 
and a few other matters in doubt. CI research is ongoing, with many projects 
scheduled.

We also note again that, according to Linda Chamberlain's post a while back, 
Alcor prudently stresses that it cannot assure good service to members 
overseas, and in general will not accept foreign life insurance, and requires 
that prospective foreign members sign a special disclaimer.

Meanwhile, everyone is at risk. To minimize risk, you need to join an 
organization and make your arrangements with minimal delay. The cost is 
usually small and the paperwork hassle no big deal, at least at CI. The 
universe has no malice, but neither has it mercy. A miss is as good as a 
mile, and if you are buried or cremated your chances are sharply reduced. 

Robert Ettinger
Cryonics Institute
Immortalist Society
http://www.cryonics.org

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=15637