X-Message-Number: 9851
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 13:32:52 -0400
From: Saul Kent <>
Subject: Time And Money

        In response to my concerns about the costs
of reanimation, both Thomas Donaldson (9841) and
Mike Perry (9848) argue that, if the cost of reanimating
a particular patient is too high at a particular time in the
future, the solution will be to continue to maintain that 
patient in suspension until the costs become affordable. 
As Thomas puts it:

        "As an outer limit (and I think it will become
'simple' long before that) I find it quite impossible to
believe that in the year 3000 (Christian era) IF we learn
how to revive people at all, it will not look like the 
simplest of tasks.  Something you give to a youngster 
(not that there will be many youngsters around) as a 
minor exercise in medicine."

        I agree, in general, that the further into the
future we go, the less expensive it is likely to be to
reanimate cryonics patients.  It's also true, of course,
that once a patient is frozen, it becomes possible to
maintain that patient for an indefinite period of time, 
for thousands of years, if necessary.

        It's also true, however, that the longer a
patient has to be maintained in suspension, the 
greater the chances of that patient being taken 
*out* of suspension for one reason or another. 
We're all familiar with the phrase "time is money"; 
well, in the case of cryonics, "time is risk" as well.

        Thomas asks what I mean when I say
that, even if we cannot "validly" estimate the 
price of reanimation, we should still try to 
do so.

        What I mean, Thomas, is that I think
the cryonics societies should recognize and
disclose that there *will* be costs associated 
with reanimation, that they should discuss the
issue as best and as honestly as they can in 
their promotional efforts, that they should give 
their views as to how they expect to deal with 
these costs, and that they should make it clear 
that it is in the interests of members to provide 
money for these costs.

        Members will then have the opportunity
of comparing the position of different organizations
on this issue, and will have more information and
opinions to rely on in assessing whether they think 
they have set aside enough money (and other 
assets) to cover *all* the costs of cryonics.

        Like it or not, the costs of cryonics and 
its affordability are likely to become bigger and 
more controversial issues than they are today
in the relatively near future.  Improved cryonics 
methods will cost more.  Improved cryonics 
methods will make it easier to estimate the 
costs of (and timeable for) reanimation. 
Improved cryonics methods will motivate
some people to be more concerned about
the costs of reanimation.

        Success in any area inevitably
bring problems with it, and cryonics will be
no exception to this rule.  The reason I'm looking 
forward to (what I believe) will be some of these 
problems is that I think that dealing with them
will be a requisite for our ultimate success...the 
chance for continued life (and health) into the 
distant future. In short, the problems of success,
as I see it, are far better (and more challenging)
than the problems of failure.  Certainly, estimating
the costs of reanimation is likely to be one of our 
most challenging problems.

---Saul Kent

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=9851