X-Message-Number: 32627
Subject: Re: CryoNet #32618 - #32625
From: David Stodolsky <>
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 10:48:32 +0200
References: <>

On 14 Jun 2010, at 11:00 AM, CryoNet wrote:


>  At some point, the professional will realize he/she is not going to make any 
headway and will either; (a) decide the patients are "dead already," and keep 
collecting a healthy paycheck, while not having to do more than a few cases a 
year; (b) walk away and never look back, or (c) walk away in disgust and attempt
to make the public aware of what they have witnessed.
> 


Without the cooperation and support of medical professionals, cryonics will 
continue to be excluded from scientific societies, and regarded as quackery by 
most professionals and the public. The most ethical professional will choose C. 
And the bad press generated from option C makes things worse.




> Mr. Platt also writes that "...promoting cryonics is extremely difficult, 
mainly because, almost anyone can see that cryonics doesn't work yet." The real 
problem is that anyone familiar with existing equipment and procedures, related 
to hypothermic procedures, can see that it's unlikely to EVER work, given the 
amateur nature of the equipment and personnel. By comparison, "suspending" 
someone for a period of an hour, should be relatively simple, shouldn't it? By 
that, I mean a company trying to suspend people for decades, or centuries, 
should certainly be capable of performing hypothermic procedures, which were 
perfected decades ago, should they not? Yet, what would happen, if we were to 
substitute Alcor and/or SA staff members and equipment for what would normally 
be found in open-heart procedures? Would approximately 96% of their patients 
survive, as in conventional medicine? Given what I've seen, my bet would be 100%
would die. It's absurd to think people who can't even begin to match given 
technology, which has existed for decades, can surpass it.


Platt himself can look forward to a decades out-of-date suspension. Then he will
have a really long time in suspension, which could be put to an end by a 
religious fanatic with a few hand grenades or an overzealous politician looking 
for votes. Without substantial growth, cryonics will remain vulnerable to these 
types of attack. I guess Bertrand Russell had it right when he said, "Some 
people would rather die than think...."



> Mainly, however, for many years I have tried to influence people 

> not  to  look for magic mass marketing solutions, but to  keep on doing  what
> we know works somewhat, namely, working patiently and lovingly with your  
> own relatives and friends. 


Working patiently and lovingly with your own relatives and friends is part of 
the "mass marketing" solution I have proposed.



> I could cite lots 
> of  complaints about him, but what's the point? He apparently has the ear 
> and  confidence of Kent and Faloon, with plenty of funding, so if he ever  
> finds a better approach presumably we'll know about it.


If a single individual is in a position to impede progress in suspension and 
marketing, undermine the reputation of the Movement by self-serving and 
dishonest behavior, and there is nothing that can be done about it, then the 
future of cryonics is not good, to say the least. 


People who are dishonest, end up believing their own lies. Therefore, the chance
of him finding a better approach is slim. In his ideologically driven universe,
the right answers are obvious, no need to listen to anyone else, including the 
public that cryonics organizations hope to serve.


If the figures we have recently seen are correct, then an industry association 
that could make everyone aware of the waste that is occurring would be worth 
about a million a year to the Movement.


> 
> As I have said repeatedly in recent years, progress is slow but membership  
> and patient numbers have been accelerating,


The sign up rate is constant in absolute numbers, which means a decline, since 
growth rates are always calculated from the size of the current population. 



> There are those, such as myself,
> who feel that a revived cryopreserved mammal is the first essential
> step.


Survey results show that revival of a mammal would have little, if any, effect 
on sign ups. 



> There are others who feel that since cryonics makes sense for
> them, it must make sense for other people, too. Alas this ignores the
> fact (very obvious if one attends any meeting of cryonicists) that
> almost all people who sign up for cryonics are far from the center of
> most bell curves. 


This is like a bus company, that only gets one of a thousand potential 
customers, interviewing the ones that do take the bus to find out why most 
people aren't using the bus. Good luck, you will need it.


> Their outlook is not in any way typical. You simply cannot generalize from 
this
> specific.


This view indicates a continuation of the failed marketing approach I mentioned.
It assumes all the ineffective strategies:

> 'Customers are the problem'  

> 'Marketing research has a limited role',

> 'Customers are treated as a mass',

> 'Competition is ignored',

> The [cryonics] organization's mission is seen as inherently good


The marketing strategy of cryonics is shown to be a failure and no one is even 
acknowledging the situation. Looks like many more years of stagnation, at best.


dss

David Stodolsky
  Skype: davidstodolsky

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32627