X-Message-Number: 12179 From: Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 18:44:18 EDT Subject: brain only? Doug Skrecky (#12174) writes, in part: > Working people usually have some small amount of life insurance provided >"free" as part of their benefits package. Reducing the cost of a cryonics >service below the amount of this insurance effectively reduces the >upfront cost of cryonics to zero. Good point, although I'm not sure what the quantitative impact would be. After all, once again, large numbers of people can easily afford cryonics but don't choose it. Fred Pohl declined Alcor's offer of a free suspension, even though he had contributed a good bit to the dissemination of information about cryonics. Yes, there would probably be SOME impact. > Advantages of storing only the brain, as opposed to the entire head >include, no negative PR, I don't buy that. The family could, as I think Doug previously mentioned, have a "normal" funeral with a body (sans brain) in a casket in a funeral home, and could keep the brain freezing confidential from family and friends, true. But--besides adding to the expense--that would sound, if anything, even worse than head-only freezing when discussed in the press. >potentially greater cryoprotectant infusion/protection, I'm not sure about that either. If you don't perfuse until after removing the brain, then there will be more delay, as well as the difficulty of working with a delicate unsupported brain. >and lower storage costs. Lower storage cost, but greater preparation cost. >The main negatives would be possible increased physical damage during handling. Yes, excising the brain etc would be difficult and time consuming, adding to cost and risk. CI now does store sheep brains rather than the whole heads, while accumulating research specimens for later evaluation. This saves a lot on storage. But sheep brains are much smaller than human brains, both absolutely and as a fraction of the head size, which changes the equation substantially. >Dehydrating a brain during shipment in an concentrated cryoprotectant bath would >effectively reduce storage costs by shrinking the brain volume. A further benefit >here could be cheap vitrification, with potentially far superior preservation of cellular >structure during freezing. Whether dehydration or/and vitrification should be done will be decided primarily on the basis of effectiveness in minimizing damage that may be difficult to reverse, not on the basis of storage cost. Robert Ettinger Cryonics Institute Immortalist Society http://www.cryonics.org Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=12179