X-Message-Number: 3246
From: Robert D Grahame <>
Subject: CRYONICS Cellular damage during freezing (refs)
References: <>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 94 19:08:09  GMT

I currently find myself corresponding with some skeptics, including a
professional biologist. After getting past their "it's all a con" front, I
find that they do know roughly what the cryonics suspension procedure is and
is trying to achive, and support the idea of more research being done, but
think current progress is way too little to justify actually performing
suspensions. They have no knowledge of how cryonics organisations are
organised or funded, assuming we're all in it for the large short-term
riches. <grin> Hence some of their negativity.

I disagree with them on several levels (eg. I think their ideas of possible
repair technologies are predictably mid-20th century medicine; molecular
technology would be dismissed out of hand as 'unproven'), which is why I'm in
sign-up, but I'm after any quick pointers to :-

1/. The current levels (in %) of cryoprotectant perfusion achieved in animal
tests in the fluid surrounding the 'average' neural cell.
2/. The amount of time elapsing using current best-practise between cellular
integrity being ruptured by ice crystal formation/osmotic pressures and
solidification.
3/. Any estimates of the extent of the cell contents diffusing during (2).
(eg. is it at least possible (given a theoretical 'perfect' repair
technology) to see what bits came from which cell?)

My guesses are 1=20%, 2=60-120mins, 3=50-75% traceable.

Can anyone firm this up for me?

Thanks,

-- Bob Grahame, Streatham, London. LAN Consultant
-- Voice : +(44)71 406 7795 : PGP Key available
-- Towel : 0d8'22"W51d24'16"N+29M

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=3246