X-Message-Number: 27212
From: 
Subject: Re: Cryonics Self-Regulation
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 16:41:24 GMT

  The topic of cryonics regulation has provided Alcor Director
Brian Wowk with yet another opportunity to make yet another
mean-spirited attack on the Cryonics Institute. 

http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/dsp.cgi?msg=27204

   I believe that Brian makes some mistaken assumptions about costs, 
but I will only comment on the accusations concerning technical issues. 

  Brian Wowk wrote:

>    I don't see how common standards can be established in cryonics as long
> as the two main organizations can't agree on
> 
> - whether sterile technique is needed
> 
> - whether cardiopulmonary support is needed
> 
> - whether ischemia protective medication is needed
> 
> - whether perfusion should be open or closed circuit
> 
> - whether perfusion should be monitored
> 
> - when perfusion is complete

   In asking "whether" Brian is saying that CI has no capabilities or concern 
in each of the areas he mentions. I challenge Brian to provide evidence
for the claim that CI does not use sterile technique. 

   Concerning cardiopulmonary support and ischemia, if Brian thinks that
I am unconcerned about ischemia or cardiopulmonary support, why does he 
think that I organized the Toronto local group to do standby for a 
Cryonics Institute patient:

  http://www.benbest.com/cryonics/toronto.html

  Try typing "ischemia reperfusion injury" in Google, Yahoo or MSN Search 
and my article on the subject will come up number one. Even the word "ischemia"
will bring the article to the first page for Google and MSN. Does that sound 
like a lack of interest or concern? 

  Why did I buy an ACDC Thumber and Portible Ice Bath for both the Cryonics
Institute and for the Cryonics Society of Canada? Why did I spend so much
time trying to negotiate a contract with Suspended Animation for Standby and
Transport for CI Members who choose to have it? Does that sound like I have
no concern for ischemia or cardio-pulmonary support? 

   The Cryonics Institute model was created in the 1970s at a time when the
local people assumed that soon every state and jurisdiction would have their
own cryonics organizations. Their main concern was to provide for themselves
and their members, most of whom lived in the Michigan area. It has been less
than 10 years since the majority of voting CI Members have not been close 
enough to attend the annual meetings in person. No provision was made for 
transport from other states or outside the United States. 

   Standby and Transport is not part of the CI cost structure, but that does 
not mean that it is not a concern.  We have a "Local Help Rider" to the 
contract which CI Members living outside of Michigan must use to provide 
additonal funding for local funeral director service and shipment to Michigan. 
Members can contract with their funeral directors for additional service. 
When Robert Ettinger was living in Arizona he paid his local funeral director
a $1,000 yearly retainer to train in cryonics rescue procedures. The funeral
director's team was standing by when Mae Ettinger deanimated. We now have
arrangements for CI Members to obtain professional Standby and Transport
from Suspended Animation through a special Local Help Rider.  Marta Sandberg
brought her husband to Michigan to deanimate in a hospice while she and 
others were standing by to provide immediate support. 

  Concerning Open and Closed circuit, I used to think that closed circuit 
was very important, but I no longer believe it is -- at least for CI. The
main justification for closed circuit that I see is cost. We use an
inexpensive vitrification solution.   M22 costs and arm-and-a-leg, so I can
understand why Alcor would not want to lose a drop of the stuff. We monitor
perfusion pressure so there is no compromise for open circuit in that regard.

   I don't know why Brian would suggest that CI has no concern for perfusion
monitoring and completion time. He has had the opportunity to read the
writeups of our 2005 vitrification cases, both of which refer the use of a 
refractometer:

         http://www.cryonics.org/reports/Dog_Thor.html

         http://www.cryonics.org/reports/CI69.html

  Brian's attack is only one example of why I am not eager to spend any
time on creating a cryonics self-regulatory organization. I have exhausted
too much of my energy fighting other cryonicists and I feel that cryonics is
better served when I direct my energies to more fruitful tasks. The problem
of creating a self-regulatory organization would involve more than fighting

with hostile Alcor people. It would involve fighting with CI people internally,
and would also have to include the American Cryonics Society, Suspended 
Animation and perhaps Trans Time, if not Oregon Cryonics. Trans Time had
no representative at the 2002 CryoSummit. At the Summit an agreement was 
made to create an International Association of Cryonics Organizations, but
nothing ever came of it. 

           -- Ben Best, President, Cryonics Institute

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=27212