X-Message-Number: 26650
From: "David Pizer" <>
Subject: Chemical 
Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2005 11:29:43 -0700

Kenita Watson said:  
" But the few who sign up for chemopreservation cannot
 be properly counted in isolation:  those few might
 have been talked into making the additional financial
 commitment to cryonics given time, and might be lost
 unnecessarily if it turns out that chemopreservation
 is inadequate."


DAVID:  Just the Opposite.   Chemical preservation would be a good way to get 
people interested and then the could "upgrade" as they got older and if they 
started making more money.  


Kennita:  "Knowing that Alcor provides
 chemopreservation might also undermine confidence in
 their cryonics procedures. 


DAVID:  A few, maybe.  But my long experience in cryoncis leads me to believe 
the benefits outweigh the risks.  


Kennita:  "Also, preserving
 brains alone (apparently, without even the heads
 around them) is likely to bother more people (or
 bother people more) than preserving whole heads
 or whole bodies.  And the media are likely to
 have a field day with "brain in a vat".  Or not; I'm
 just thinking about some possible downsides.
 


DAVID:  Just the opposite.  Freezing organs like brains, or as it can also be 
called - organ donations - are much less gruesome to the general public then 
cutting off and freezing heads.  Plus, many times when the relatives are against
a neuro it is because then the can't have a funeral for the deceased.  Brain 
can be removed so that  a funeral is still possible.


 Content-Type: text/html;

[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=26650