X-Message-Number: 9590 Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 03:50:02 -0400 From: Saul Kent <> Subject: Motives Bob Ettinger asks several questions in yesterday's posting on Cryonet (9570) regarding the motives of Bill Faloon and myself in investing in 21st Century Medicine (21CM). Bob first advances the notion that we have "disparate aims" in funding 21CM that must, somehow, be "reconciled". That is not my view of things at all. The ultimate goal of 21CM is to achieve suspended animation. That's certainly no secret. We've been very open about it ever since we launched 21CM, and will continue to be open about it in future fundraising efforts. Every research project 21CM has conducted, and is planning to conduct, is part of an overall plan to achieve suspended animation. Our cerebral resuscitation program, for example, deals with reducing damage to the brain, which is essential for the achievement of suspended animation, and which also has enormous potential for saving the lives of many people who would otherwise die in accidents and from other causes. Similarly, our organ cryopreservation programs are important for the achievement of suspended animation, and have the potential of saving the lives of people who need organ transplants. Certainly, cryopreservation of the brain is the most important of these projects for suspended animation, but research in kidney and heart preservation will likely lead to data and insights that will prove valuable in preserving the brain, and vice versa. One question to answer is the extent to which there are similarities in cryo- = preserving different organs, and whether we can come up with an all-purpose protocol for the preservation of entire organisms. We have strong evidence that underlying, fundamental techniques and processes, such as vitrification, may be critical in success with *all* types of cryopreservation. If this proves to be true, we may find financial opportunities in a variety of markets outside our primary areas of focus. In any case, we expect scientific success in the cryopreservation of any one organ to help in learning to preserve other organs. Such successes would, of course, lead to substantial revenues, further investment in 21CM, and greater prestige for the company. Success in the cryopreservation of any organ will also lead to improved techniques in cryonics. In your posting, Bob, you seem concerned that we might "burn" 21CM funds for suspended animation research that might prove especially difficult to achieve, and which might be contrary to the interests of some investors. I don't see that happening. Any success we have in cryopreserving any organ, or in developing advanced generic cryopreservation techniques, will likely be applicable to cryonics, with royalities going to 21CM. And we won't have to wait until we achieve suspended animation to garner revenues from the use of 21CM advances for cryonics. As you well know Bob, cryonics companies preserve people with unperfected methods I'm con- vinced that improved cryonics methods based upon research published in science and medical journals, and backed by a well-funded suspended animation research program, will lead to major growth in cryonics. 21CM revenues from cryonics will continue to increase as cryonics methods are improved. When suspended animation is finally achieved, of course, these revenues will almost certainly skyrocket! Bob, it is inappropriate for you to reach a conclusion (as you have done in your posting), based upon Paul Wakfer's postings on Cryonet, that Paul "appears now to have been exploited" in his dealings with 21CM. At best, you know a small fraction of one side of a long and complex story. That's not enough Bob...not nearly enough! You then ask (presumably, as one of the "nasties" you postulate in your posting) whether people who invest in 21CM will find that their money ends up "SUBSTITUTING for Kent/Faloon money, rather than supplementing it." This question is also inappropriate because the answer to it should *not* play a role in whether someone chooses to invest in 21CM or not. That decison should be based upon one's assessment of the company's capabilities, manage- ment, planning and prospects for success, *not* the future investment plans of other investors. Your question is also clearcut evidence of your lack of knowledge of Bill and myself. We're currently investing about $1 million a year in 21CM. We're doing so, as you correctly noted earlier in your posting, in order to save our own lives. Given that motivation, which you apparently believe is true, I find it difficult to under- stand your charge that we may withdraw our funding from 21CM after others invest in the company. Do you really think Bill and I are satisfied with $1million a year funding for 21CM? Do you really think we wouldn't like to see it raised to $2 million, $3 million or $10 million a year? If so, you know nothing about either of us! You talk about making "hardball calculations" about whether to invest in 21CM or not. Any calculations you make about 21CM will be worthess without further investigation of our company, our staff, and our management. Again, I invite you to visit 21st Century Medicine in order to learn more about the company. I believe you owe it to us, to yourself, and to your fellow members in CI. ---Saul Kent, CEO 21st Century Medicine Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=9590