X-Message-Number: 14414
Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2000 19:32:38 -0400
From: Paul Wakfer <>
Subject: Re: #14409 - Update on remaining work?
References: <>

> Message #14409
> From: 
> Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 19:13:36 EDT
> Subject: Update on remaining work?
> 
> Greetings All:
> 
> I have at last digested Paul Wakfer's update and the responses it set off,
> and developed another set of questions, if everyone is not too tired to
> answer them.

Personally, I am never too "tired" because this is related to the most
fundamental aspect of cryonics and the essence of the potential
extension of my life.

> The reason I'm behind, BTW, is that the unmoderated newsgroup deteriorated to
> teeny-porn postings and for reasons unknown it took several tries to get
> subscribed here.

I assume that you mean sci.cryonics. I have not looked there in sometime
because I do not find much of any great import or interest there. IMO,
sci.life-extension is a much more intellectual newsgroup. It is contains
information of critical importance to all serious life-extensionists and
even discusses cryonics now and then usually with cross postings to
sci.cryonics.
 
> Well, two years ago vitrification solutions were unsatisfactory and it was
> estimated to require $10 million and about ten years to perfect whole-body
> preservation.   Now (per Paul) all the major breakthroughs have been made,

And, BTW, I sent a copy of my statements and estimations to the chief
scientist involved and he has replied that he regards my statements as
accurate without being overly optimistic.

> fortuitously at very little cost.

This is a litle misleading. They were not exactly "fortuitous", they
were the result of new minds working synergistically together with older
experienced minds to both bring new ideas, rekindle old ideas, and
formulate new approaches. In addition, the cost was not "little"
compared with the funding which has previously been put into anything
related to cryonics research. Although it was little compared to
standard public or private research projects. Altogether the amount
which has been invested in 21CM is of the order of $2 million

> So what will the new cost be? (I realize the $10 million was a very round
> number.  But can it be refined -- if the new best-guesstimate now is in fact
> less, it makes the plan more attractive.  Obviously some wealthy entity
> should become interested somewhere between ten million dollars and
> twenty-seven cents...)

The original $10 million estimate was only for the first ten years ($1M
per year) and would only attain a demonstration of perfected whole brain
suspended animation, hopefully a whole head being grafted onto another
animal as per the experiments of Robert White and others.
A second 10 years at $10M per year was then estimated to be required for
perfecting whole body suspended animation.

> And what remains to finish the job?  Is it mainly proving that brain tissue
> functions after immersion in vitrification solution and freezing and thawing,
> and is the next step full brains and then slices of other tissues and then
> full organs -- and then, of course, organisms. Or?
> 
> What is the timetable, what are the costs?

These are excellent questions. They are what I wanted to have laid out
before I began a second push to gain the final 60% of the pledges
necessary to begin the Prometheus Project. This was my reason for
helping to get the critical scientist involved and necessary to be
resident in California.

For various reasons, the company involved does not wish to publish any
such formal plans, timetable and cost analysis.

As I understand the current situation, here are the general steps
necessary to perfecting whole body suspended animation.

1. Continue to perfect cryoprotective perfusates in parallel with rabbit
kidneys and brain slice diffusion models and sodium/potassium ratio
viability testing.

2. In parallel, begin perfection of the brain slice global evoked
potential micrography test model. 

3. In parallel, begin lower temperature whole rabbit kidney and whole
brain perfusions, with the same perfusates being successful in 1.

4. Use the micrography test model of 2. for slice viability studies.

5. Apply the micrography test to whole brain surfaces. (Testing of
kidney viability is done by transplantion into a well whole rabbit).

6. Begin using whole heads (perhaps dogs) to replace the brain
perfusion, and work up to seeming viability.

7. Graft whole dog heads (as the Russian Metchnikoff did) onto whole
well larger dogs after full suspended animation.

8. After demonstration of full viability for whole dog heads, do the
same for whole body dogs.

9. Apply perfected suspended animation to primates (baboons).

10. Start clinical trials on humans.

Many variaions on this are possible and are even likely as the work
proceeds, however, as things stand currently, I think the above is
reasonable. My estimate is that it will take 10 years to conclude step 9
at a cost of about $2M per year, but possibly with more money per year
needed toward the end. In addition, 10 times more money could definitely
speed it up by several years.
 
> Has anyone been inspired by the time and cost saving exploits of Craig
> Ventor?  Can automation techniques cut the costs way down?

I am well aware of Ventor's achievements wrt the human genome project,
but I do not think that the techniques or anything like them apply here.
The human genome project is basically one of reverse engineering, or
decoding of something which exists. Suspended animation, OTOH, is a
process which is yet to be discovered and perfected.

> Might it be
> better to rethink plans in terms of the latest techniques than to try to
> raise money?

Both are probably needed.

> (That's what Ventor did, and cut the genome completion from
> something like 15 years (or five years from when he started) and five or ten
> billion to something like ten months and 0.2 billion.  The Government people
> he beat were not exactly slouches -- they used the best techniques available
> when they started ten years earlier, but Ventor used the best from the time
> he started, just a few years later, and he annihilated them.

As I stated above, the nature of the two problems are highly disimilar
and I don't think that similar techniques apply, although as with almost
any project more parallelism (at much more cost) will allow the time to
success to be shortened.
 
> The more plan details and research needs are published, the more likely
> someone, some sophomore biology student somewhere, will make a suggestion
> that cuts time and costs in half. Or so we may hope...

Again, I don't think this is applicable here. The problems involved are
too much of a "black art" rather than a rigorous theoretically based
science, and the scientific basis of them is extremely broad. So far all
such "off the wall" ideas have just not been practical. The people
involved are highly knowledgeable and have brilliant minds fully capable
of "off the wall" thinking on their own. In addition, they have been
around and among all these potential solutions for decades. However, it
is certainly possible that some new idea will come forth in some area of
the project which will shorten the overall time to completion. This is
another reason why the details of the project should be continually
broadcast widely, and why the scientists involved remain open to all
suggestions.


-- Paul --

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=14414