X-Message-Number: 28223
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2006 07:57:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: human screener <>
Subject: TMTend: TimesUK article-->Zygote cryonics?

Continued from

	Anthony has agreed with me that cryonics for
discarded embryos is a valid idea insofar as cryonics
goes.[20]  He covered a lot of ground in that post but
to maintain the rather thin connection to the original
idea in this thread, -- which was that Mark's support
of a screening program that discarded zygotes with an
order-of-magnitude much larger DNA-blacklist
constituted a possible problem (paradox or irony)
since it was likely that the zygotes, given the large
6,000+ trait list, had DNA in common with Mark (or any
of us)-- I'll ask Mark Plus-- if he's reading Cryonet
(although most of his writing is being directed to his
blog now [21])-- if-- given that he supports the
screening program, would he then support a
zygote-cryonics program for the discarded? 
	The End: Anthony-- I gotta go. Thanks for the
ideas.... Mark-- if you can, let readers here know
what your position is on proactively preserving
discarded zygotes if you will. Alcor and CI board
members-- if you can, let readers know if policy
accomodates frozen embryo storage. I've run out of
free time. It's been fun. --human screener.

[20] Anthony agrees witha and expands on zygote/embryo
[21] Mark Plus's blog, Supersurvival Needs

Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=28223