X-Message-Number: 9813 Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 02:57:56 -0400 From: Brenda Peters <> Subject: RE: Linda #9784 -------------------- Begin Forwarded Message -------------------- From: Brenda Peters, 72727,560 To: @cryonet.org, INTERNET: Date: Fri, May 29, 1998 10:58:38 PM RE: RE: Linda #9784 I'm sorry that Linda Chamberlain felt the need to defend Alcor as a result of my one and only posting in probably three years. My only mention of Alcor was that I had been on the board of directors and that Jerry Leaf's generosity had given them an address for many years. My pride in CryoCare, its organizational structure, its lack of overhead and debt, its commitment to excellence, and its elite membership is nothing new. I don't apologize for it. Linda rightly points out that "The longevity, integrity, and security of the organization that will protect you, as a frozen patient, for decades..." is important. In my opinion, however, she wrongly points out that it "could, in the end very well be more important even than the technology used to preserve you". I find this unlikely. The longevity, integrity, and security of the preservation of "nothing" is being done today in cemeteries. Clearly, the preservation of today's cryonics patients is more than "nothing", but the better we can make it, the better off we'll be. If we can actually preserve with some degree of confidence the information that makes me "me," then the long term aspects are negotiable and many options could exist (even options that we haven't thought of yet). I dare say that I am in the unique position of being the *only* person to have been quite so intimately involved in both Alcor and CryoCare. I was a board member of Alcor for eight years and a board member of CryoCare for three years, as well as holding other leading and intimate organizational positions and participating in all aspects of the running of both organizations. It became disturbingly apparent to me that changes and innovations were critically important to longterm survival. The structural innovations are now in place and the technical improvements now exist and continue to be upgraded and innovated (as I've said before, literally monthly) with the finest team (*the dream team*) ever assembled in the history of cryonics. This team exists and is employed by 21st Century Medicine. Linda says: "With 20-20 hind sight, they may tell those of us who belonged to large, strong organizations (even the Joe Cannon's) that to their (future, advanced) medical technologies the difference in the degree of difficulty (of repair and revival) between the highest of high tech cryopreservations and the most severely compromised, turns out to be insignificant." That would be lovely. But life is seldom so. But how wise is it to depend upon such pies in the sky? My focus is on the practical, knowable, and rational concern that what we are doing to our patients now may not be enough. *I'm* going to be one of those patients one day and I want more than pies in the sky. I haven't worked this hard for this many years to be satisfied with "hope". I already have that. Always had. I think "hope" makes us more psychologically able to cope with life and death. I think we are evolutionarily selected to have hope, to manufacture hope if need be, in order to get through the day. What I am talking about is evidence. I want some degree of confidence, not hope, that my identity is being preserved and *only that* will give me the kind of hope I seek. Linda tells us what we should know but it is never pleasant to admit: "This is particularly important when we face the fact that most cryonicists today, and probably for some time to come, will not receive the highest technology that is possible. Cultural traditions, hostile relatives, and deathist laws are just a few of the obstacles that too often stand in the way of the cryotransport team's best efforts." All the more reason to improve the technology. The more we can do with the worst that we have to work with *now*, the better the chances of the desired outcome later. Linda says she chose Alcor "because we not only strive to give our members the highest quality cryopreservation that we can..." I'm sure that's true. I know of your concern over Alcor's personnel, knowledge, ability, and quality of "suspensions" since Jerry Leaf's demise and the loss of MIke Darwin. I know of your efforts at improvement. I respect that effort. I wish you luck. Striving to first of all reattain the standard that Alcor had in the 80's, and maybe later to actually improve upon that is a good thing. You absolutely owe it to your membership to do so. But *so* much more is possible, and we're doing everything we can to make it happen. All my best and long life, Brenda Peters -------------------- End Forwarded Message -------------------- Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=9813