X-Message-Number: 2215
Date: 08 May 93 03:04:47 EDT
From: Michael Riskin <>
Subject: CRYONICS: More on ColdRoom Analysis

To Brian Wowk:
   The only really important point I wish to make about the building of an
ESTIMATED $150,000 coldroom is that it is a very significant amount of
money for Alcor to invest at this time on an unproven idea, and we all
know what tends to happen to estimated construction costs anyway. You
essentially addressed my concern with your discussion of the alternative
smaller coldroom concept. It should include provision for whole body as
well as neuro suspension since a very significant  % of Alcor members are
WB's. I fully support simultaneous development of -130 suspension
techniques and compatible patient storage, or for that matter, any other
rationally based methods/concepts at manageable initial costs. 
   One of my more important concerns is investing material sums of money
and labor based on projected patient and membership growth. Current
projections are based on insufficient data. You made the following
estimates :  
    In about a decade, a large coldroom will be at 100% capacity with
231 patients, a growth of 204 patients, broken down to 146 neuros and 85
wholebodies.
   Based on 6 years history, (a five fold patient increase) you extended
the current patient population from 26, to 130 patients in 6 years ,
which I could then with the same logic extend to 650 patients in 12
years.
  My own more conservative estimate calculates to about 100 patients in
ten more years.
  So, we have a patient estimate from 231 in 10 years to 650 in twelve
years, to 100 in ten years.
  Membership growth?  This is an important number since it of course
directly affects patient population.  Suspension membership % increases
from 1989 to May 1993 are as follows:
          1989     32%
          1990     28%
          1991     57% (Year end jump due to impending price increase)
          1992     17%
          1993      2% (For four months...what shall we annualize this at?
                       One suspected reason for the low rate is potential
                       members waiting for the Omni contest to end)  
   
    If membership growth is in the 30% range, a number casually used for 
projection discussions, then large scale, more economical storage should
be developed relatively soon.  With a smaller increase, say 10%, the
urgency is a lot less. 
    We need to pursue economic efficiency  while continually developing
more effective suspension and storage technology.
    Economic efficiency for Alcor, to a great degree, increases with
economies of scale, which in turn is dependent on membership growth, and
the resulting  greater financial resources then supports research of all
types, which makes makes suspension more desireable, which attracts more
members, which then requires large scale coldroom storage. 
    As an aside, Brian, even if large scale coldroom technology was totally
justified, where are we gonna put it?  Lets press forward with smaller
scale storage experimentation, while serious effort to relocate and 
improve suspension technology proceeds.  


types.

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=2215