X-Message-Number: 15739 From: Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 12:22:36 EST Subject: Grimes vs. facts Again, mostly for the sake of late-comers: Grimes says, >I don't think I ever said that Robert Ettinger is dishonest. He said it several times in several slightly different ways, including repetitions of the term "cover-up." and: >I just said that his recent posts reveal that he knew nothing about the procedures of >another organization, and never bothered to ask, I have repeatedly asked Alcor and consultants for information, privately and publicly, and have repeatedly looked at Alcor's web site, which has been confusing until the last few days. In particular, a glycerol prodecure is described in the present tense (very recently modified a bit), and even one of Alcor's primary consultants was confused, as per a private message. I had assumed that the glycerol procedure was simply an outdated one, but after Hugh Hixon's postings I now understand that the glycerol procedure is still standard for Alcor's whole body patients, while the newer, secret procedure applies to neuro patients. Since the newer procedure is believed likely to yield better results, at least under favorable conditions, there is a suggestion that Alcor whole body members perhaps should switch to neuro. and: >but went ahead and accused them repeatedly of doing things that were likely to >cause human damage to frozen people. He has not denied that he did >this. It is very clear. Total baloney. I merely criticized Fred Chamberlain's article, "Vitrification Arrives!" as overreaching, and I stand by that. The Alcor people and their consultants are acting in good faith, but their guess that the current neuro procedure "probably" results in vitrification is based on theory and indirect evidence, even disregarding the fact that the current storage in liquid nitrogen is not the most appropriate for them, and disregarding the fact that real patients can hardly ever be treated under ideal conditions. We cannot verify Alcor's results, because the procedure is secret, and neither can anyone else. Beyond that, no one at all, anywhere, ever--not even Alcor's people or their consultants--has evaluated actual animal brains after subjecting them to Alcor's procedure and rewarming from - 196 C or even from - 130 C. Probably they will do such evaluations in coming months, and then we will know a bit more. But CI uses only procedures that we ourselves have tested and that have been evaluated by unbiased professionals. For a bit of perspective, once more, remember that after half a century there are still disagreements about the best ways to cryopreserve very simple systems, such as blood or sperm. After hundreds or thousands of studies, there are still sharp disagreements about the effectiveness of vitamin C in various health conditions. Improvements are always desirable, but no one knows when or whether a particular improvement will be crucial, so one must always consider the trade-offs. and: > why his organization doesn't even bother to test >the $99 ice blocker that might improve their preservation. As repeatedly mentioned, our understanding from Alcor consultants is that the ice blocker is useful only in conjunction with the secret and unavailable new CPA. Nevertheless, testing of several different kinds of ice blockers is on our agenda, although not our highest priority. Robert Ettinger Cryonics Institute Immortalist Society http://www.cryonics.org Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=15739