X-Message-Number: 174 From att!CompuServe.COM!72320.1642 Fri May 25 06:15:47 1990 Return-Path: <att!CompuServe.COM!72320.1642> Received: from att.UUCP by whscad1.att.uucp (4.1/SMI-3.2) id AA28545; Fri, 25 May 90 06:15:46 EDT Received: by att.att.com; Fri May 25 06:09:54 1990 Received: by saqqara.cis.ohio-state.edu (5.61-kk/5.900430) id AA18638; Fri, 25 May 90 06:10:06 -0400 Date: 25 May 90 03:45:09 EDT From: STEVE BRIDGE <> To: KEVIN <> Subject: REPLY TO Cryonics #? (Timothy Freeman) Message-Id: <"900525074509 72320.1642 EHI26-2"@CompuServe.COM> TO: KEVIN In answer to Tim Freeman: > Has anyone tried to persuade representatives of other cryonics organizations to post news to this mailing list?< I don't know of anyone from the other organizations who have hooked into this list or any other computer conversation anywhere. [ Yes, a few people from other organizations are receiving messages from the cryonics mailing list. I hope that they do not feel like outcasts when so many of the messages are Alcor-oriented. - KQB ] >I don't understand what "...they could be revived" means legally.< It doesn't mean ANYTHING legally. Not yet, anyway. What I meant was: We cannot prove that a person in cryonic suspension is potentially repairable, and therefore "revivable to life and health" anytime in the future. As far as PROOF goes, a person in cryonic suspension would be considered "dead" by the courts --and by a lot of other people, frankly. I don't think the courts are likely to use the word in any other way, such as "resuscitation," which means simple recovery from lack of heart beat/ and or respiration. Steve Bridge Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=174