X-Message-Number: 9773
Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 06:39:45 -0400
From: Thomas Donaldson <>
Subject: CryoNet #9766 - #9772

Hi everyone!

To Mr (?) Leitl: The article you quote is now behind the times, and
it is not even cryonics research which has produced that. The current
public limit to revivability after heart stoppage is now 10 minutes,
as done by Peter Safar and his coworkers in research towards means 
to lengthen that period. 

Why should noncryonicists want to lengthen that period? Because even
with the former 5 minute limit many people could be revived, but 
would show clear signs of brain damage. Five minutes just isn't long
enough for rescue teams to reach most people. Safar has published
a good deal on this problem, and a rescue team with current technology
should be able to perform his procedures.

Mike Darwin and (funding by) Saul Kent claim to have significantly
lengthened even this period, to 15 minutes or longer. So far as I know,
they haven't published their methods. Whether you believe them depends
on whether you trust them when they make such statements; I know both
men and would trust them, but still hope that they can publish their
results ASAP. Details are critical in such things.

To Tom Mazanec: I asked if you would be willing to contribute towards
efforts to improve suspensions. I did not (if I recall properly) set
a figure on how much your contribution might be. Your recent posting
says nothing about this. Many cryonicists are quite aware of the 
deficiencies of present suspensions; they choose suspension not because
anyone can promise revival but because if they are not suspended 
it's clear that they will never be revived. Such an attitude is 
appropriate if you are dying and cannot choose to continue living.

So, first of all, are you willing to contribute?

Second, about future suspensions and the future of cryonics: I DO 
believe that cryonics in some form (the form of storage doesn't matter
here, merely that storage can be done) will be needed into the indefinite
future. I do not believe this because I have a clear idea of the 
hard medical problems of (say) the year 2525, but because I doubt very
strongly that human beings (or any intelligent creatures that may 
evolve from us) will have a complete control over the Universe. There
will always be accidents and other problems, deliberately created or
inadvertently run into. This feature of the Universe has been called
entropy. To put it in a paranoid fashion, the Universe is constantly
trying to kill you, and takes every opportunity to do so.

But regardless: are you willing to contribute? If you aren't, even
a small amount, then your theory as to why people do not join is 
false in your own case. That of course suggests it may be false in 
other cases.

			Best wishes and long long life to all,

				Thomas Donaldson

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=9773