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