X-Message-Number: 15305 Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 16:33:00 -0500 (EST) From: Charles Platt <> Subject: offer to David Pascal Believe it or not, David, I am primarily interested in establishing some facts here. While you have done a thorough job ridiculing my opinions, my opinions are not the issue. If you can convince me that any of my factual assumptions or information about CI procedures is incorrect, I'll be glad to restate my position publicly. For instance, if the dog experiments conducted by Darwin, Harris, et al did not accurately replicate the perfusion protocol used at CI, in what way did they differ? You need to be a bit more specific, here. I know, from prior correspondence with you, that you are able communicate fairly, when your anger doesn't get in the way. I suggest that since email can be cumbersome and time consuming, a better method would be for us to talk on the phone. If you are willing to do this, I'll call you at CI or at any other location of your choice, and we can spend as much time as you have available, trying to clarify the points of disagreement. I don't have time to answer your extremely lengthy CryoNet post, and frankly its tone doesn't encourage me. But I will find time to post my conclusions after any conversation that we may have. My one remaining question is why CI doesn't name the Canadian lab that supposedly verified your belief that ramping perfusate concentrations over a period of time produces either a marginal improvement, or no improvement at all. Since this conclusion contradicts all relevant prior cryobiology research (so far as I know), it does strain credulity. If you were able to name the lab, that might help. --CP Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=15305