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