X-Message-Number: 26479 Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2005 06:27:40 -0700 (PDT) From: "D. den Otter" <> Subject: Cheap cryonics alternatives instead of lawsuits > On Jul 2, 2005, at 7:18 AM, Mike Perry wrote: <<Another issue raised is that many cannot afford cryonics anyway. In more developed countries this problem is not so acute because there are ways that persons of modest means but in good health can make arrangements--mainly through life insurance.>> Yes, but what about those who are *not* in good health, and the elderly? Let's face it; if you're an old or sick "person of modest means" who (for whatever reason) doesn't already have life insurance, you're pretty much screwed regardless of where you live. It doesn't have to be that way, though... <<Still, it certainly is an issue. Litigation as has been proposed would be expensive--perhaps some of the funds could be used in some way to help the needy who would choose cryonics but are financially unable.>> Exactly! For example, some of these funds could be used to develop alternative preservation protocols (neuroplastination, neuro freeze drying, or some hybrid procedure). This could probably be done with just a very modest initial investment, possibly less than the cost of a single CI suspension, and the service could potentially be offered as cheap as $500-$1,000; especially if the effort is periodically supported by (modest, but tax-deductible) donations from within the cryonics community. If you want to save lives, start by lowering the preservation threshold. At such low (but realistic, mind you!) prices a lot of people might think "hey, why not? What's there to lose?" I still think the lawsuit idea is kinda 'interesting', but imo offering cheap cryonics alternatives would be a bit more constructive (and considerably less offensive to the religionists, Joe Blows & The Powers That Be, if you care about that sort of thing). And NO, I'm not saying freeze drying & plastination are, or should be presented as, cryonics' "equals", preservation-wise. They're not (presumably). What I *am* saying is that even lo-tek preservation is better than burial, let alone cremation. Always preserve as much as you can afford -- it really is that simple. Future reconstruction techniques will probably more than suffice to 'bring back' someone who has been straight frozen, freeze dried or plastinated. And if not (and remember, 'never' is a very, *very* long time), preserving them was still the moral and rational course of action. Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=26479