X-Message-Number: 1915
From: 
Subject: Re: Ever rising curve of expectations
Date: Sun, 7 Mar 93 20:10:19 PST


I would like to offer an outsider's perspective on Mike Darwin's recent
post about the high (and getting higher) cost of cryonics.

First, a brief introduction.  I'm a 26 year-old doctoral student in
physics at Simon Fraser University (Vancouver, Canada).  I have been
reading Cryonet for about fifteen months, have just subscribed to Cryonics
and Canadian Cryonics News (yes Ben, I mailed the check ;-), and am
getting very serious about signing up with Alcor (what's holding me back?
inertia, concern about Alcor's stability, and the current yearly fee
structure which discourages life long membership).  My wife is less
enthusiastic, coming from a strict protestant background, but will likely
also take the plunge.  We are both in peak physical condition, suffer
from no medical problems and, statistically at least, will be around
for quite some time to come. 

We currently pay $100 Canadian per month in life insurance premiums (a 
$50,000 policy).  If we plan on seeing this money go towards suspension
costs, it doesn't make any sense to place a for-profit third party
in between Alcor and its members.  As Mike says, that profit could be
used to make Alcor more fiscally stable and finance a lot of cryonics
research.

However, there must be negative aspects to the rosy scenerio Mike painted.
The biggest problem I foresee is that of public perception.  As it stands,
Alcor can easily deflect suggestions that it's yet another get-rich-quick
scheme.  One of the first comments I hear after explaining the concept of
cryonics is "sounds like a scam."  This perception is excellent
ammunition for those who would like to see cryonics banned altogether.


On a separate note, I strongly encourage Alcor to change the membership
fee structure to a less socialistic approach.  I have strong misgivings
about a system that discourages people from becoming members
at an early age.  It is patently unfair that I (at 26 years-old) should
pay the same as someone who signs up on their 65th birthday.  Also,
why do married couples pay a reduced rate?  Ideally, I'd like to see
charges only for services provided (maybe a token initial membership
fee) - that is, suspended members would pay the entire cost of running
Alcor.  One man's perspective. 

Darran Edmundson


Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=1915