X-Message-Number: 14938
From: 
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 22:22:08 EST
Subject: Fred's vitrification report

First, after reading Fred Chamberlain's piece, and Linda's, on their web 
site, reprinted from the upcoming issue of CRYONICS, let me salute the Alcor 
people for their continued assiduous efforts and new option. Good work. 

Second, inevitably, some comments and questions--not meant as quibbles or 
denigrations, but as serious uncertainties.

a) A very great deal is omitted in Fred's piece, and in related material from 

21CM and INC. Fred says, "This is not a report of scientific findings   " Well,
much of Fred's piece conveys the impression that it IS a report of scientific 
findings, or at least meant to be scientifically persuasive, but so much is 
left out that no outsider can properly evaluate it. Maybe no insider either.

b) Apparently BioTransport is now ready to do neuro vitrifications for Alcor 
members, or will be as soon as they settle the pricing issue. (There is some 
ambiguity. Fred starts out by saying the discussion does NOT reflect actual 
decisions taken, and then goes on to say, "Effective immediately.") Now we 
encounter the conflict of interest question again. BT is a separate, 
for-profit company, even though run by Alcor members, but Cryonics Institute 
(and others, as far as I know) have not been offered any information or 
proposals for utilizing their procedures as options for our members. Neither 
has 21CM offered any proposals for licensing their procedures.

c) Fred's report mentions e.m. photos of vitrified rabbit kidneys at - 130 C. 
This is considerably different than kidneys stored in liquid nitrogen and 
then thawed and examined, let alone tested by transplant. It also mentions 
"brain tissue" (what animal, how treated?) cooled to -80 C and then 
thawed--again a considerable difference from cryonics patients. It also 
mentions vitrified blood vessels cooled to - 130 C. Again, a big difference 
from human brains thawed from liquid nitrogen. 

All these results do indeed have value, but they are far from definitive. 
Unless I am mistaken, no one has yet claimed fully successful vitrification 
even of rabbit kidneys. As for mammalian brains, there does not yet even 
exist ANY WAY to know for sure whether or not cryopreservation has been fully 
successful. 

What we need are evaluations of relatively large mammalian brains, treated 
under conditions comparable to those available for human patients, as well as 
under ideal conditions, after storage in liquid nitrogen and after thawing. 
That is the focus of ongoing CI research and reports.

Another reminder, by the way, that about three years ago Dr. Pichugin, for 
the first time anywhere, showed coordinated bioelectric activity in networks 
of neurons in rabbit brain pieces perfused with glycerol and then thawed from 
liquid nitrogen. This is an important functional test--probably more 
important than the chemistry of metabolism--although again not definitive.

d) Fred says the INC hippocampal research showed 53% "viability" after 
vitrification and rewarming. Viability by what criterion? Many years ago, 
many papers in the literature showed, for example, that several metabolic 
activities remained intact to a large extent even when FREEZING was done MANY 
HOURS post mortem. (See our web site.) There are many, many metabolic 
pathways, all contributing to "viability," and probably many of them with 
unknown potential bottlenecks.

In general, we need at least three different kinds of tests: histology or 
structure through microscopy; chemistry or metabolic pathways; and 
electrophysiology. CI expects to do all three, and the work is ongoing.

e) A relatively minor point: Fred says dewars need back-up, since in case of 
failure of vacuum they are subject to very rapid boil-off. That is not true 
of the CI cryostats.

f) Another relatively minor point: Fred says cracking or fracturing may occur 
in liquid nitrogen. This has not been observed with our procedures.

g) Fred says that "Even if freezing injury is completely repaired," full 
recovery of a cryopatient is uncertain. He must have misspoken himself 
here--after all "completely repaired" means just that.

h) Finally, the thrust of Fred's article is that, except for cryoprotectant 
toxicity, vitrification solves all problems. That is surely going too far, 
since only a few tests have been applied to only a few regions of the brain, 
mostly after atypical or simplified procedures.

Once more, I don't want to rain on anyone's parade. The better any cryonics 
organization does, the better I'll like it, and we will be delighted to learn 
from anyone's successes. Ideally, the Establishment--the big brains and the 
big money and the big influence--would take over and allow us to do things 
more enjoyable than struggling with the problems of sick and dying people and 
their families. Meanwhile, we have to deal with reality as best we can.

Robert Ettinger
Cryonics Institute
Immortalist Society
httP://www.cryonics.org

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=14938