X-Message-Number: 27971 From: "marta sandberg" <> Subject: The other side of standby Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 17:24:34 +0800 IMHO, there are many different viewpoints on stand-by services and all of them are legitimate. This is not an issue of black or white, rather it is an issue of looking at the facts and then making a value judgement. In case anybody is interest, I will list the reasons I have opted out of standby. COST. For me it is a bad bargain. To me cryonics is about loving life, and that means loving the life I live right now. The insurance premiums needed to pay for standby would take up a large part of my annual salary. That would seriously affect my 'joy of living now' factor. I am not willing to squeeze every penny for the next thirty years so I _may_ have a chance to a new life in the future. PUBLICITY. I have become one of the spokespersons for cryonics in Australia and Sweden. In most interviews I will be asked two hostile questions. The first is about cryonics being a con-game and the second is about cryonics only being for very rich people. (If you are interviewed, try taking the wind out of their sail by answering these questions before they have time to ask them) I think we are doing a lot of harm to the image of cryonics by saying that only those who can afford standby service are serious about cryonics. QUALITY. I am by no means certain that a standby service will provide the best quality freezing possible for me. There are a number of reasons for this. Funeral directors have a lot more practice than a standby team. They also have better contacts and experience in arranging to fly bodies to the USA. The same goes for access to hospitals. Nor am I particularly happy with some of the standby protocols. Until I know exactly what we need to preserve and the best way of doing so, I want the simplest possible preparation of my body. I have always been afraid that the massive use of drugs in sophisticated suspension procedures can obliterate some delicate brain chemicals. SOCIAL Nor should we forget the impact (both on the client and on their friends and family) of having a standby team on 'death watch'. We have lost patents in the past from this. TIMING. It is very hard to predict the time of death, unless you are willing (and legally able) to influence your death through some sort of euthanasia. Standby teams have always had problem in either not getting there in time or having a too long standby. This is not a problem with a funeral director as they are local. OTHER OPTIONS Many countries, such as Australia, have other options. Down under we have Cryonics Association of Australia. They are local and they have dealt previous cryonic suspensions. Other countries have their own organizations. Best of all is probably friends and family. Getting your family involved in the process and asking them to contact your local funeral director (and talk to your hospital), is probably the best safeguard you can have. It would be interested if somebody could graph quality of suspension against family involvement. I have a feeling you will find a very high correlation. I can go on with other reasons, but this will do for a start. I am not trying to say that other people should not chose a the standby option, but I am saying that it is not a black and white issue. After having looked into all the options, I have decided against it. Others might decide for standby. Let's hope all of us are right. Long life, Marta _________________________________________________________________ Be the one of the first to try the NEW Windows Live Mail. http://ideas.live.com/programPage.aspx?versionId=5d21c51a-b161-4314-9b0e-4911fb2b2e6d Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=27971