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