X-Message-Number: 21490 From: "Chrissie de Rivaz" <> Subject: Report on A Tort ou B Raison (Right or Wrong) French TV Channel 1 Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 11:00:03 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000B_01C2F519.2F3CDAA0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Report on A Tort ou B Raison (Right or Wrong) French TV Channel 1 March 10th 2003 Firstly, my apologies for the delay in sending this report. I have asked several times for the names of the other panel members, largely to present correct spelling of their names. However, as one comes to expect of media folk, the information has not arrived. Nor have I seen the final version of the programme, so am unaware of any editing that took place. No, they didn't send the promised tape either! An interesting programme which in total, lasted for 1hour and 45 minutes. It is largely a series of debates on various topics, interspersed with short pieces of film to illustrate the subject. Presented by Bernard Tapie, an ex-minister of the French Government and now a 'TV personality', it addresses any controversial subject which provokes reaction. Interestingly, the first half of the programme was devoted to the problems with the equivalent of the French National Health service and the growing number of apparently untreatable new strains of virus and bacteria. The second part of the programme was looking at aspects of science which impact on our lives. Cloning, IVF, Cryonics and Bionics were covered, with a variety of experts to head each section. The segment became dominated by an Italian doctor who had a great grievance about coverage of his work by the world press. (He's the one who worked on IVF with menopausal woman, allowing women of 60+ years to give birth) He could not attend personally and shouted from a studio about how he was a hero and all the French were idiots. The audience yelled back, as one might imagine! It became tedious after a while, as he waved around pictures of (different coloured) cats he claimed were clones and talked of many babies he knew to be cloned. He would not reveal names or locations of course, as this would infringe upon on their liberties. Hopefully, his dominance in the final version of the programme was edited. The debate that followed was led by a French doctor who is working on therapeutic cloning. Of more interest to most of us was his hope to be able to produce replacement organs and other body parts from an individual's own DNA. Doctor Pierre Boutron was the specialist cryo-biologist who was speaking about his own work on IVF and the freezing of human embryos. We had a long discussion before the programme, to me more interesting than the final TV input! He was quite adamant that cryonics would never work for humans and expressed the wish that it could be successful. He even said that he would be prepared to take the gamble for himself, if he could afford it. He reiterated his words on air and was clearly never going to listen to anything anyone could say in defence. He is a respected scientist throughout the world and clearly, his words influenced the rest of the panel. They were all very polite, though very sceptical of any outcome. I did point out that they quoted much greater prices than anyone charges, especially when they suggested it was a waste of money. One of the panel suggested that the price was irrelevant if cryonics wouldn't work anyway! I disagreed and pointed out some of the now common procedures which were once considered impossible, not least the definition of clinical death. They seemed to like the fact that I admitted reanimation was impossible today but we were looking at future technology. It was comforting to see the now familiar snippet of film with Andy Zawacki at C.I., amidst the sceptics. Another piece of film was looking at the tiny creatures, tardigrades, which can be completely de-hydrated for many years and regain viable life when water it reintroduced. The concept was in support of regaining life after reanimation, of course but the other scientists claimed this was somewhat irrelevant compared to cryonics. The final section of the programme dealt with the use of biologically controlled prosthetics now being developed. I felt it was another relevant item for all our futures as it was looking very much at brain impulses attempting to control movement of limbs in an involuntary manner. Again, a very high powered professor was the spokesman and an acknowledged world expert. He admitted to a very limited success but said that early failures were actually leading to present success. He is optimistic that bionic technology is going to bring help to many people with disabilities on the future. One interesting discussion I had (off camera) with Dr Boutron was concerning vitrification. Though he agreed that this was a much more likely success potential, he claimed that no perfusate fluids so far developed could possibly work. I did wonder if I'd misunderstood when he said no-one was yet using them. As I pointed out, Alcor are currently using vitrification and have been for some time. Maybe my French isn't as good as I thought, especially as he said he was in close contact with most of the cryo-biologists working on cryonics. He agreed that it was possible that Dr Pichugin may be on to something but I'm afraid his 'prejudice' was just too great for me to compete. A charming, clever man, nonetheless. It was a good experience, even if I failed to convince anyone. There was some talk after the programme of a full length documentary, at some future point, based exclusively on cryonics and enabling us to give a stronger case without so much opposition. We shall see! Paris still remains one of the most beautiful cities on the world and I was grateful for the opportunity to speak on behalf of cryonics. -- Sincerely, Chrissie de Rivaz http://Chrissie.deRivaz.com for my on-line novels and more http://www.arthurbowker.com for my father's fine bone china. ------=_NextPart_000_000B_01C2F519.2F3CDAA0 Content-Type: text/html; [ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=21490