X-Message-Number: 485 From att!compuserve.com!73647.1215 Wed Oct 2 00:20:13 EDT 1991 Date: 01 Oct 91 02:27:49 EDT From: Thomas Donaldson <> Subject: Part II: Funding Cryonics Research Greg's second report was: 2. Very significant success in his work on vitrification of kidneys. Greg reported that he had developed an apparatus, and a system for infus- ing enough glycerol and propylene glycol (from memory I believe that was his formula) to vitrify rabbit kidneys and most important, recover about 33% of them enough that they could support life as the only kidney of the rabbit. This is a BIG milestone. Here is the issue. Greg wants very badly to use his technique on brains. Among its advantages will be that the massive destruction he found and reported at this meeting >>> would not occur at all <<<. However, there is a serious problem. No one else in the Red Cross, where he works, has anything but hostility to cryonics and its ideas. To do brain experiments he requires materials with which to work, not only the solutions of special cryoprotectant (designed for vitrification, not freezing) but also chemi- cals such as osmium tetroxide, to stain the resulting tissue and examine its structure after it has been vitrified and then rewarmed to living temperature. But they watch him closely to see that all the material he draws from the Red Cross Labs is used solely and purely on the vitrific- ation of RABBIT KIDNEYS. Greg believes that with $15000 he could work out a method to vitrify brains and verify its success. He was asking for contributions. Unfortunately there is a disgraceful problem. Attendance at this dinner was far below what we had expected. No more than 15 people showed up; Carlos, who was doing the accounting of contributions, said that the dinner had only raised about $2000. If that accounting was gross rather than net, the actual sum for research would be even less. I know that members may have had many reasons not to attend or contribute and find it difficult to criticise any INDIVIDUAL member. But if we really expect any progress toward true, reversible cryonics suspension, WE MUST MAKE THAT PROGRESS OURSELVES. Who else is willing to donate? This is a general problem, and an important one. "Science" in the abstract is not going to produce successful suspenison methods or successful revivals. Even Eric Drexler, in his latest book, shies away from cryonics; I per- sonally promise that without any work by cryonicists, themselves, even nanotechnology will give us marvellous electronics but not one repair machine. I think I was not the only person attending who did not feel happy with the level of contribution. Yes, someday, someday, someday we may very likely find a way even to revive the brains we freeze today. But it'd be a whole lot better, and we'd be a whole lot better off, if we work out how to >>> PREVENT <<< that problem. Where are the contributions? "Science" or "Nanotechnology" will never save us. WE must do that ourselves. Thomas Donaldson Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=485