X-Message-Number: 28253
References: <>
From: Kennita Watson <>
Subject: Re: ThT: TimesUK article-->Cryonics for Frozen Embryos
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 11:22:00 -0700

I think an embryo-reservation venture is a *great*
idea!  Thoughts:

AFAIK, CI accepts embryos, but doesn't advertise
the fact; a press release ASAP seems to be in
order.  What is between them and such a PR?

Alcor doesn't accept them.  I think the
idea would need to be brought up at an Alcor Board
meeting. <...> "The next Board meeting is scheduled
for Saturday, August 5, 2006, at 11:00 AM (MST)."
Does anyone happen to know (a) how to add an item
to the agenda; (b) how to participate in board
meetings remotely; (c) any cogent reason that I
needn't bother.

I don't want to go the "souls" route, certainly
not with the existing organizations -- they have
enough to deal with.  Maybe there's room for a new
organization.  It seems it would be relatively cheap
to start (a single cryostat can hold a *lot* of
frozen embryos, and the contracts would be relatively
simple, since the patients are already in cryostasis).

I still don't think a new organization should go the
"souls" route, because real fundamentalist Christians
may well be against the freezing of the embryos to
begin with -- if a man and woman can't make a baby
as God intended, it's not part of His divine plan (or
something like that).  Similarly, keeping a person
alive "longer than God intended" may be viewed as an
evil thing.

Enough for now.

Live long and prosper,

> Message #28246
> Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2006 07:07:16 -0700 (PDT)
> From: human screener <>
> Subject: ThT: TimesUK article-->Cryonics for Frozen Embryos
> Continued from
> http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/dsp.cgi?msg=28242
> 	Yesterday's news about Bush's veto of extra fed funds
> for embryonic stem cell research [25] illustrates and
> strengthens the point I made yesterday.
> 	My basic point was that the cryonics community is
> positioned to solve a problem. The problem is that
> there is huge emotional resistance to  discarding
> frozen human embryos after 5 years and to performing
> research on stem cells obtained from human embryos. As
> a result, there are a half million frozen embryos in
> cryostasis. As of yesterday, they will definitely stay
> that way-- until destroyed or adopted-- within 5
> years.
> 	If a cryonics organization stepped in and basically
> said to parents and IVF labs where the common 5 year
> limit on storage is being approached  We will maintain
> your frozen souls for as long as it takes to find
> adoptive parents , cryonics would gain instant
> mega-publicity around the world. The president might
> even visit that cryonics company to congratulate and
> thank them.
> 	With attention drawn to cryonics, a parallel would be
> drawn between the embryonic souls and the
> cryonics-patients' souls. The parallel will be denied
> by many secular cryonicists, however there would be
> enough support for that parallel which would lead to
> cryonics gaining federal  legal protection for the
> potential life of cryonics patients as  potential
> persons  in the same legislation that protects frozen
> embryos.
> 	The missing link in this scenario is the US federal
> position on the 5 year limit. I'll look into that over
> the next few days.
> [25] Report on Bush's veto of ban on embryo stem cell
> research, July 29, 2006
> http://lfpress.ca/newsstand/News/International/2006/07/20/1693234- 
> sun.html

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=28253