X-Message-Number: 9874
Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 18:48:07 -0400
From: Jan Coetzee <>
Subject: Closer to freezing point
References: <>


What progress has been made in closer to freezing point suspensions. If 50% of 
the

public are not worried about revival why do research on it at this point in 
time.
Closer to freezing point suspensions would reduce cost drastically and put
cryonics within the reach of many more.

J.C.


Message #9855
From: "Scott Badger" <>
Subject: Boston Globe Article on Cryonics
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 08:27:39 -0500

Recent Boston Globe article:

http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe/globehtml/154/Immortality_and_the_chosen__f
rozen_.htm
I haven't seen any mention of this article yet on cryonet, but if you
examine the web-site you'll see a reader-survey is offered (only 4
questions).  Interestingly, despite the negative and skeptical reporting
style of the author, almost *one-half* of those polled said that they
*would* consider being cryonically preserved if the funds were available.  I
know this is far from being a valid survey, but that seems a surprisingly
high figure to me given most of the discussions I have followed on this
list.  It suggests that *available funds* is one of the more critical
objections to even considering cryonics.  Predictably, there were far fewer
wanting neuro-suspensions than *full-monty* suspensions.  Again, however,
almost half would trust their cryonics facility to work in their behalf to
eventually revive them.

BTW, I expressed my lack of enthusiasm for the author's reporting style via
direct e-mail, and encourage others to as well.

Best regards,

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=9874