X-Message-Number: 12201
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 20:01:18 -0500
From: david pizer <>
Subject: Re: CryoNet #12192 - #12196

At 05:00 AM 7/27/99 -0400, CryoNet wrote:

Many years ago, when I attempted to write something humorous (I have long
forgotten what), Mike Darwin  (at that time editor of "Cryonics") told me
"your writing stinks (and you spell bad)" and  that I should never again
attempt to write anything humorous.  Well ten years later I guess nothing
has changed.  Anyhow, I will attempt to explain my weak attempt at mixing
humor with important cryonics topics.

>Date: Mon, 26 Jul 1999 12:00:45 -0400 (EDT)
>From: diana singh <>
>Subject: brain donation/brain only preservation
>Hi everyone,
>For people who don't understand cryonics there should be a programme
>of education undertaken by volunteers who are aware of the subject.
>The issues involved are very sensitive and must be deliberated before
>any people are invited for "brain donation". And anyway a brain
>by a person has to be on the basis of the fact that cryonics is a
>for revival of an individual. There is nothing in cryonics that sounds
>like it is in any way an act of charity or donating of brain/body.
>It is a personal act and involves only the self(individual).
>In the light of this I think what Mr.Pizer had to say was a little

Of course you are right.  However some times relatives will oppose a person
 who wants to sign up for cryonics.  Even though you appear to be a person
of strong will, there are many failed cryoncists who did not possess the
strong will and determination that you have.  Therefore the "relatives'
affidavit was invented.

>Mr.Pizer wrote,
><They must have a certain amount of people sign an affidavit that they
>worthy.  (These could be relatives, and their family doctor.)>

>I don't think that I need any affidavit from any one to sign up for
>(or for donating my brain). It is a personal decision and no one should
>allowed to interfere in this. It would allow others to justify whether
>should be revived or not. Even people of high status will agree with
>this point.

And of course, most (if not all) cryonics organizations will allow people
to sign up with out any of their relatives supporting affidavits.  However,
it is sometimes considered best if the cryonics memeber can get supporting
affidavits.  Because sometimes when a cryoncist has died, the relatives
will try to keep the cryonicist from being suspended.  I have seen that
happen - not just when they tried but when they actually did prevent the
member from getting suspended.  So I believe a potential cryoncist should
do all possible to prepare for any and all things that can go wrong at
suspension time.  Often some of them do go wrong.  It is the thinking of
some cryonics organizations that if your relatives signed an affidavit to
support your position (when you were alive) they will be less likely to try
to stop your suspension when you deanimate and less likely to be successful
if they do try.

So I was talking about the "relative's affidavit" that often  (or used to)
comes with a sign-up package.

><They must demonstrate their intelligence by anserwing a list of
>questions on different forms.>

>Any one should be allowed to sign up as long as he/she can pay for it.
>It is a matter between the institute that does the preservation and the
>patient. Any outside interference will lead to complicated issues
>in the possibility of non revival.

Again a failed attempt at humor at how complicated the sign up forms can
sometimes be.

><They must demonstrate their financial wisdom by showing they can come
>with a large amount of money at their death; and show their kindness by
>donating this money to a non-profit company that helps very sick

>Donating money is a personal issue. It should be left to the individual
>patient. If a person wants to sign up for cryonics in any way
>(neuro/full body/
>brain) it should be his/her own decision and must be cleared before
>with the institute/lawyers concerned.

Again failure to amuse.  The way some cryonics companies used to do this
(and may still do) was to keep the non-profit status by looking at the
suspension as a person donating their body (or head or maybe only the
brain) to science for a very long term experiment to see if that "patient"
can some day be revived or reanimated.  The person donates their body (or
whatever part) and the cryonics organization takes that body and gets a
form or anatomical donation, which gives that cryonics organiztion the
right to possession of the body.

Besides the donation of the body, the person also donates money to pay for
this "experiment."   This may no longer be the way the various cryonics
organizations look at the proceedure.

>Although brain only preservation would be very successful in some
>(as I mentioned in one of my previous mail) because it would allow the
>burial/cremation of the patient (cultural issues) along with a full
>chance of 
>revival(personal issue). What has to be done is improve brain handling
>so that at the time of legal death a professional can  be entrusted
>with this task(removing the brain).

Several years ago, I met with the officers of a hospital in Arizona who
take human brains and freeze them right at time of death (about 20 a year).
 These frozen brains are then shipped to several other research centers.

They do not perfuse their brains and the freezing artifacts from lack of
perfusion do not seem to interfere with the research they are doing.
Nothing ever came of the initial meetings as they were not interested in
better perfusion methods and any research we wanted them to do would be
done for cash from us.  At that time, I presented their proposal to the
Board at Alcor and the majority of the board felt that Alcor could not
afford the program.

>I hope Mr. Pizer can clarify some of his points.


I hope I did not make it worse.  Thanks for your input.

Dave Pizer

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=12201