X-Message-Number: 15485 From: Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 12:06:25 EST Subject: more Grimes Some comments re Grimes, #15473 & preceding: 1. He claims to have been more polite than I have. Amazing! I leave it to the reader to judge. 2. When he asked for the delay times for the last four CI patients, I only responded with information about the last three, because that was what I remembered clearly. (Two died at home under hospice care and were processed immediately; one was not found for more than a day.) If that isn't enough, tough. I can write fast, but I can't access archives fast, and I will not go to endless trouble at his behest, especially when he has gone out of his way to be obnoxious. 3. He writes: > I have no idea why Mr. Ettinger finds it "incredible" that some people might be >revived, while others are not. Has he heard of the principle of triage (used in every >emergency room)? His incredulity just confirms my previous statement: That he >seems to feel he "deserves" to be revived. And I repeat, he shows an incredible lack of understanding of cryonics and cryonics organizations. Triage has nothing to do with it, and "deserve" has nothing to do with it. We want to save our lives and those of the people we love, and the organization has the legal and moral obligation to do its best to that end, and that is the whole of it. 4. Does lack of equilibration mean that glycerol is unevenly distributed in the tissues of our experimental animals and patients? That is a reasonable suspicion, but actual findings (specimens from different sites in the brain) do not indicate that. In any case, we have now changed over to a 4-stage stepped glycerol procedure, which will be outlined on our web site soon, replacing our current segment on Phases of Suspension. 5. He writes: > I have just asked questions, not so different from questions which a patient would >ask of a doctor, if the patient was facing a medical procedure. Stuff and nonsense. Patients rarely ask doctors about technical details, only things like will it hurt and how long will it take and what will it cost and how long will I be laid up and what are my chances--especially the last, if the situation is life-threatening. It is the RESULTS that count, and our results have been evaluated by independent professionals. 6. He writes: >R.E. wrote: "As for Grimes, however--Alcor is welcome to him." >Why on earth would CI try to get rid of someone who simply wants to know how >things work? I have not said we would turn him down, but it ought to be obvious why I would not be eager to sign up someone like this. Look at the history of other organizations. Alcor had endless internal bickering, because of the personalities of some of its people, and there was a major schism resulting in the formation of another organization, CryoCare. Trans Time and the Bay Area Cryonics Society (now American Cryonics Society) had serious squabbles, and the initial cooperation between BACS and TT broke down. There were serious squabbles involving CryoSpan and related organizations or companies, and CryoSpan appears about to fold. The fact that CI has had a much more stable history does NOT mean that our directors rubber-stamp my opinions. Our directors think for themselves, and I have been overruled more than once, in fact frequently. But our people generally do not have inflated egos or sand-paper personalities, and we don't need that. 7. In #15474 he asks: > Do other organizations use the glycerol before the person is moved to the cryo lab, or is this a feature which is unique to CI? Yes, CPA perfusion by funeral directors is unique to CI. Except in rare cases, it must be arranged well ahead of time. 8. He writes: > After you wash out the blood, it would be easy enough to use a standard organ >cryopreservation solution, There isn't any "standard organ cryopreservation solution"--organs for transplant are not cryopreserved. Anyway, washout and perfusion are done in the same operation, in sequence, so there is no place for an intermediate use of Viaspan or something similar. 9. In an earlier post he wrote: >Personally I am not very interested in Alcor since they have no presence in the UK anymore (or so I have been told). Remarkable! In view of his remarks, he ought to be VERY interested in Alcor--surely interested enough to send them an email for direct information on their UK presence and capabilities. He has time to write endless criticisms of CI for Cryonet, but can't find out from Alcor, or its web site, whether Alcor can service him? Please! 10. He writes: > [I want] SHORT SIMPLE ANSWERS TO SHORT SIMPLE QUESTIONS Baloney. Every answer to him will only elicit argumentation and demands for more and more details. One purpose of our web site is to allow inquirers to find what they need without separate individual correspondence. We do indeed welcome questions and suggestions. But we respond as seems appropriate, using our own judgment, not necessarily as the writer demands. In the course of the go-rounds of the last month or so, in a very few cases it has been shown that some of our web segments led to misunderstandings. These have been changed, or are in the process. Also, as I said, new segments are upcoming. We will always correct any errors that can be demonstrated, and we will remedy any inadequacies, according to our best judgment. On the whole, I think most readers will agree that our site is the most open and informative of all. Robert Ettinger Cryonics Institute Immortalist Society http://www.cryonics.org Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=15485