X-Message-Number: 18198 From: References: <> Subject: Re: New option? Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 09:17:17 -0800 From Michael Riskin Yes, I answered Dave. And in fact, I changed my paperwork prior to hearing about Dave's question, to reflect that desire in anticipaion of the quintuple coronary bypass I was about to undergo in a few days. My request was for a neuro vitrification and a whole body "standard" ( likely a straight freeze as it was explained to me because of tech considerations at this time), both parts stored in the same bag/container. As to cost , storage shouldnt be a factor as right now both head and body are at ln2 in the same place. The extra cost is in the the two separate suspension procedures to be billed ( one neuro and one whole body). Michael ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stephen W. Bridge" <> To: "david pizer" <> Cc: "[unknown]" <>; "David BE" <>; "[unknown]" <>; "Bob Schwarz" <>; "Michael Riskin" <>; "Mathew Sullivan" <>; "Mike Perry" <>; "Steve Van Sickle" <>; "Mark Muhlestein" <>; "Judy Muhlestein" <>; "Joe Hovey" <>; "Gary Meade" <>; "Mark Voelker" <>; "Michael Seidel" <>; "Steve Harris" <>; "[unknown]" <>; "[unknown]" <>; "Hugh Hixon" <>; "Karla Steen" <>; "David Greenstein" <>; "Jenifer Chapman" <>; "Jessica Lemler" <>; "Jerry Lemler MD" <>; "Saul Kent" <>; "Carlos Mondragon" <>; "Steve Bridge" <> Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 9:37 PM Subject: New option? > Message text written by david pizer > > > Assuming the above is true, why couldn't Alcor do a combination proceedure > where they use the new vitrification-related proceedure for the patient's > head, and the old proceedure on the rest of the body? > < > > Did anyone answer Dave on this yet? That seems possible to me, too, > although I can see that the two different storage methods required might > make it more expensive than Dave would like. Still, it would be worth > looking at and would show some flexibility in our new plans. > > Steve Bridge > > Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=18198