X-Message-Number: 16174
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 15:16:00 -0400 (EDT)
From: Charles Platt <>
Subject: The British Situation

I have resubscribed to CryoNet to raise an issue that has not roused much
interest, so far as I can tell from the archives at cryonet.org.

As I understand it (and I am willing to be corrected, since not all of my
information is first-hand) twenty-five British cryonicists were deprived
of their Alcor coverage earlier this year because they did not have
American life insurance.

Moreover--and this is the part that seems hard to believe--when the
British cryonicists offered cash as an alternative to life insurance,
their offer was rejected.

Specifically, they suggested performing their own perfusion services, and
would ship the patient to Alcor with a wire transfer of funds sufficient
to cover long-term storage. These funds would be provided by the British
members of Alcor UK, who would take out a bridging loan, at their own
risk, until they were reimbursed by the patient's life insurance, which
would name Alcor UK as beneficiary.

Zero risk to Alcor in the USA.

The offer was refused. As a result, Alcor US has ejected (as I understand
it) all their members in the only country in the world, outside of the US,
where activists had succeeded in setting up their own facility and had
been trained in basic procedures of standby, transport, and perfusion.

I have been participating on a UK cryonics discussion list where, as you
might imagine, anti-Alcor sentiment is quite strident. Some of the British
people are so disillusioned, they feel inclined to abandon their own
facility and equipment and place themselves in the hands of the Cryonics
Institute, whose friendly local mortician, Mr. Albin, will provide a
somewhat less sophisticated service. This would be the end of the very
creditable effort by UK activists to maintain their own capability.

Because these events strain my credulity, I am looking for some rational
explanation. Why would any cryonics organization reject members who are
offering to take all the financial risk themselves?

Presumably, Alcor will be rejecting all 60 of its non-US members (with the
possible exception of its 14 Canadian members--although, who knows?). This
would represent almost a 12 percent reduction in membership. If any of
these overseas people had enrolled in the life-membership plan, presumably
Alcor will have to refund a large sum of money. If the overseas people
are not life members, Alcor will lose about $20,000 a year in membership
dues. Moreover, since some members typically name Alcor as a beneficiary
in their wills, there is the prospect of additional loss of future revenue
from this source. (A primary reason that The Cryonics Institute is in
such good financial shape is that it has received some extremely generous
bequests over the years.)

Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't this one of the most bizarre decisions
in the entire history of cryonics?

--Charles Platt

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=16174