X-Message-Number: 27144
From: 
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 10:21:47 EDT
Subject: Correction on my posting

In a message dated 9/28/2005 5:00:38 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
 writes:



The concern about a "reversal" of a death benefit due to  resuscitation of  
our "patients" is a non-issue.  

As far  as the inscos, and most of the (less well educated) world is   
concerned, a "death certificate" is a permanent and final statement  of  
condition.  

Let's hope...and work hard...to make sure  they are not correct in this.  :)

For Centuries,

Rudi  Hoffman




Rudi again, with a correction of my above posting.
 
I have received a personal email from a person in a position to know who  
provided me new information.
 
Since I truly wish to be faultless in at least one area of my life,  accurate 
and totally reliable information regarding cryonics funding, I am  compelled 
to correct my above statement.  

Since my statement was so sweeping and nonprovisional, even a single  instan
ce of an exception would make it erroneous.  

Reversal of  death proceeds is not and may not be in the future a  

"non-issue."  This is a dismissive term implying that there could  not possibly 
be an 
issue regarding "definition of death" in the future, and is  overreaching, and 
unprofessional on my part.  I was wrong, I  apologize. 

Instead, may I say more accurately, in the  determinitive opionion of the all 
the executives of better than 30 insurance  carriers I have discussed this 
with over the past 11 years, that they have NO  concern that there would be a 

chance of the insurance company asking for the  money back upon rescusitation.
 
I still agree with Professor Ettinger that in the overall scope of things  we 
need to worry about, this aint one of them...
 
Kind regards,
 
Rudi
 
 


 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"

[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=27144