X-Message-Number: 28242
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2006 07:36:49 -0700 (PDT)
From: human screener <>
Subject: ThT: TimesUK article-->Cryonics for Frozen Embryos

Continued from 
http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/dsp.cgi?msg=28223

	Here's a little update on this entire train of
thought that I've been going through in this series of
posts-- It now appears to me as though a  Cryonics for
Frozen Embryos  program is going to be inevitable--
sooner or later. All the related pieces have been
falling into place in my mind over the past several
days. The possible implications for cryonics are
startling.  
	Read this article in the latest issue of Mother Jones
[24] that I believe will pursuade you that there is an
 opportunity  for cryonics to step in here. 
	Regardless of the inevitable rejection and resistance
of the concept by most cryonicists, there is a crying
 need  in the DNA-screening and IVF  markets -- if
that's language you're comfortable with-- for a
 really long term frozen embryo tissue storage
solution beyond 5 years  that gives parents peace of
mind by assuring them that all efforts will be made to
bring their frozen embryos to term asap-- whether
that's next week or 10, 20-- 100 years from now. A
cryonics firm that jumps into this fray will create
instant noteriety and have 500,000 instant  leads  in
the U.S. alone-- as well a possible phone call from
the Pope. 
	Thanks to Ettinger and Seidel for their feedback on
the possible positions of the cryonics firms regarding
frozen embryos. [22][23]. 

[22] Cells4Life might have expanded Alcor's storage
http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/dsp.cgi?msg=28225
[23] Ettinger sees no reason why CI wouldn't accept
frozen embryos
http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/dsp.cgi?msg=28228
[24] MOTHER JONES-- brand new article
http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2006/07/souls_on_ice.html?welcome=true



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=28242