X-Message-Number: 29824
Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2007 21:41:59 -0700
From: "Charles Platt" <>
Subject: Re: CryoNet #29822
References: <>

The following is a brief personal response to yesterday's post from
Melody Maxim. For those unfamiliar with her name, she was hired by
Suspended Animation as a perfusionist, and was assigned tasks
associated with the air-transportable perfusion system (ATP) and
readiness in general. She expressed strong interest in being General
Manager of the company, and equally strong feelings that I was
unsuited for that role. She became discontented at the company and
resigned earlier this year. Subsequently she has posted a long series
of messages on at least one online forum, venting considerable rancor
against Suspended Animation in general and myself in particular. I
responded initially, but have not done so since that time because it
seemed to me that she had no interest in a real debate.

I coauthored the report which she has quoted on CryoNet, and made some
of the logistical decisions during the case which it describes. I was
not able to participate during the field work, and based the sections
of the report that I wrote on statements from participants. Also, as
the report itself states, "A voice recorder was used throughout the
procedures at the mortuary, and its record was a primary source for
many of the events described below." Ms. Maxim is assuming that the
report is an exact and complete description of what occurred.
Obviously we tried very hard to make it accurate, and it is an
unusually long and detailed account, especially by current standards
in cryonics. Still, Ms. Maxim is aware that the coauthors of the
report were not present during the events described, and had to make
inferences from the available data. Interested readers will find the
full text of the report at www.suspendedinc.com/reports.html.

Even if every detail of the report is accurate, there are alternate
interpretations which are at least as plausible as the ones she
chooses to make. For instance, if the bypass loop was open, I doubt
that injurious pressure would have built up during the events as
described. In addition I am told that during cryoprotective perfusion,
Cryonics Institute followed its usual procedure of observing the
surface of the brain via burr holes in the skull. This and other
indicators would have provided evidence of the kind of extensive brain
damage that Ms. Maxim alleges, if it existed, which I believe it did
not. The report from Cryonics Institute describing their perfusion is
available at their web site.

I certainly agree that we would have benefited if at least one person
with extensive prior experience using Suspended Animation's version of
the ATP had participated in this case. Unfortunately, since we
received very little warning (and since one qualified person was in
Europe, another was unable to travel because of a medical condition,
and the most experienced person refused to respond, citing a
conflicting obligation) the employee who ended up running the ATP had
used it only a few times during practice and instruction sessions.

Ms. Maxim herself presumably would have been an asset if she had been
present, but she made it clear, when she resigned from her position at
the company, she would not assist Suspended Animation in future cases
even as a consultant. It is ironic that she now complains about the
lack of experience of those who did respond.

It is also ironic that she complains about substitution of a venous
cannula for an arterial cannula, since she herself had been tasked
with upgrading and maintaining all aspects of Suspended Animation
standby kits relating to perfusion, and this certainly included
cannulae. During her months at the company I am told that she did
nothing to replace outdated supplies of arterial cannulae. I invite
her to clarify this point if she disagrees.

Also, so far as I could tell, she never implemented various changes
that she advocated in the perfusion circuit. When I checked the ATP in
the "A" kit after she left, I discovered an old circuit still in its
sterile wrapping, even though she had had months in which to upgrade
it, and building the circuit should have taken less than a day for
someone with her experience. I requested that the old circuit be
upgraded to a new circuit, and this was done before the case occurred.

While criticism may be valid regardless of the personal background of
the critic, I do find it odd that Ms. Maxim is complaining about lack
of experience in a case to which she could have contributed her
expertise, and equipment which it had been her own responsibility to
maintain.

Now that Ms. Maxim has discovered CryoNet, we may see diatribes here
comparable to the ones she has posted elsewhere. Fortunately or
unfortunately I don't have as much time for this as she does, and
therefore this is probably the only response I will make myself on
this topic. However, any absence of comment from me in the future
should not be misinterpreted to mean that I agree with statements that
she makes. Personally I believe that some of those statements may have
been made with reckless disregard for the truth.

--Charles Platt
Currently a part-time consultant to Suspended Animation
Speaking only for myself, not the company

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=29824