X-Message-Number: 3125 Subject: CRYONICS Re:Risks, good and bad Date: Mon, 12 Sep 94 21:42:45 EDT From: Stephen J. Van Sickle <> Mr. Platt: In your post you wrote: ********************** The obvious answer (I think) is to have a standby team that does NOT work for the company that stores patients. Once this decoupling has occurred, the standby team can take any good risks it feels necessary on behalf of the new patient, while the patients that have already been frozen are protected by being under the control of an entirely separate company. ********************** Does this not assume that the only other people put at risk by an agressive team working on behalf of a new patient are the frozen patients? What of the people who have contracted with the uncoupled company, particularly those who are ill and may be of need of suspension soon? If this does not constrain the actions of the suspension team, then why should the contractees rely on the suspension company to be there when they need them? Indeed, it seems to me that a new patient has more in common with the already frozen than with the not yet frozen. The team's actions are *always* constrained to one degree or another. In the case of a new patient, the team must avoid actions which will result in the patient being thawed out. This is the very same danger the already frozen face, so would not the precautions and constraints be similar? On the other hand, the not yet frozen face the danger of the team being put out of commission for some period of time, be it court order, confiscated material, or prison. This effects the frozen not at all; they have no need of a suspension team. But it greatly effects those who have contracted. They must make other arrangments quickly, or simply bear the risk of being uncovered. I suppose this could be handled with multiple service providers, and multiple contracts. But I suspect that the current state of affairs are such that there is strong incentive *not* to take the "good risks" you describe. Stephen Van Sickle Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=3125