X-Message-Number: 15564
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 20:00:37 -0500
From: Kitty Antonik Wakfer <>
Subject: Re: CryoNet #15552, Mr Smith's Thinking
References: <>

> Message #15552
> From: "George Smith" <>
> References: <>
> Subject: Is there a hidden agenda behind Jeff Grimes' questions?
> Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2001 13:06:41 -0800
> In Message #15545 Jeff Grimes in his  Subject: Hello? repeated his questions
> in a more succinct and numbered form.
> I don't feel my question about the underlying issue behind these questions
> have been answered either so I am going to apply "triage" by addressing his
> questions from a survival priority perspective.
> Maybe this will demonstrate more clearly what I have been trying to get
> across about cryonics' details versus cryonics' big picture:
> Jeff wrote a summary of his question in part of his posting:
> >
> > 1. Why does CI use glycerol that is so concentrated, it is more toxic than
> any protectant used elsewhere?
> Is some chance better than no chance?  You are not signed up for ANY
> cryonics right now.  Nothing is more "toxic" FOR YOU than certain death.
> Why not sign up first and then argue about details later?

All of Jeff Grimes' questions were answered in the same manner - just
do, don't think.  This  apparently is Mr Smith's prescription for a
major decision.  It sounds uncomfortably like a political activist
("We've got to DO SOMETHING!") or "super salesman" ("Buy it NOW before
it's TOO LATE!") to me.   


> > Which is it going to be?
> Well, Jeff, which is it going to be RIGHT NOW while you are STILL alive and
> CAN choose?
> At ANY MOMENT you could die due to car accident or heart attack, etc.  If
> cryonics fundamentally makes sense to you (and if it doesn't, why would you
> even ask these questions in this forum?  Hmmm?), why delay your decision
> while waiting for answers about mere details?
> My suggestion is to get on the cryonics lifeboat NOW.  If you have to bail
> water because of holes you think might be in the hull, don't fail to get on
> the only lifeboat (cryonics) on your Titanic, because your Titanic is headed
> for the iceberg of CERTAIN death right now.  You don't know when it may be
> too late.
> Some chance is better than no chance.
> The rest is secondary.


Cryonics isn't the ONLY "lifeboat" to the future.  Other life-extension
practices - calorie restriction the major example - have far more
likelihood of getting me to the future where rejuvenation methods are
proven and in practice than cryonics.  Cryonics for me is a band-aid,
"just in case".

But to be urged to "sign up", without thinking about - especially not
carefully - on the service quality of existing cryonics organizations,
is not doing a prospective member justice.  There are value judgments
to be made in such a decision after a review of the science (or
non-science involved) and respect for that is greatly lacking in Mr
Smith's "advice".

And what happens to cryonics members once they sign-up with a respective
organization?  Do they stop thinking independently? (Consider how few of
any but the "regulars" have said *anything* here on CryoNet re. this
discussion.)  Do they stop thinking (if they ever did) about the
procedures used by their organization?  How informed are the members? 
How much do the official organs print of the procedures/practices on the
order of Cryonics back in the '80s/early 90s when Mike Darwin
produced that magazine?   

If the members of cryonics organizations consider themselves to be in
"lifeboats", then it is imperative that they see that these are in the
best condition possible and updated as research results are obtained
from reputable science based projects.  To do otherwise is to fail to
constantly monitor and modify their "survival package", just as one
should do with his/her investments.  But if the leadership of these
organizations discourages such active participation by the rank-and-file
membership either paternally or authoritatively, I can only question
their motives.  It would be far better for all if the leadership (Alcor
& CI being the major parties) made their practices completely known
(just look at Cryonics Vol 10(5) May 1989 "A Suspension in Detroit" for
an excellent example) and learned from each other as well as from the
major scientific research effort in neural cryobiology.  

IF cryonicists inside organizations want cryonics to be a real LIFEBOAT,
then it behooves them to get those organizations in shape, re.
processes and management.  AND together with those outside of
organizations, all cryonicists should be monetarily supporting research
towards perfected suspended animation. (This last is but one of the uses
of the
output from the Hippocampal Slice Preservation Project funded by The
Institute for Neural Cryobiology.)

So, the bottom line for me, Mr Smith, is to think, think, and then act,
then think some more... keep repeating,.. ad infinitum?.

More Life To Us All!

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=15564