X-Message-Number: 31498
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2009 06:52:39 -0700 (PDT)
From: Phil Ossifur <>
Subject: DeWolf bites Alcor from Oregon


In his attempt to frame cryonics in a stricly medical model frame, DeWolf 
explores Alcor's use of 12 different drugs in the stabilization routine and says
that this might be doing more harm than good-- that the quick restoration of 
circulation and temperature drop alone outweighs the benefits of those drugs. Of
course, Alcor DOEs restore circulation and drop temperature as well, but DeWolf
doesn't make that clear in his mistitled piece. Then he says the adminstration 
of the drugs interferes with the other work.


The phrase "evidence based cryonics" is meant to impune Alcor in that he claims 
there is "no evidence" of Alcor's 12 stbilization drugs doing an good. It's 
opposed to "extrapolation based" work. In effect. Alcor would be doing "non 
evidence based" cryonics. Using terms borrowed from the medical field and 
applying them to cryonics to hide behind vicious attacks is an interesting way 
to do business. 


DeWolf then makes a startling accusation with no data to support it-- from the 
many published Alcor case logs... he writes 


:"But perhaps the most troublesome problem is that the preparation and execution
of these procedures during actual cryonics cases can seriously interfere with 
rapid and effective cardiopulmonary support and induction of hypothermia"


...as if Alcor's cases don't involve "rapid and effective cardiopulmonary 
support and induction of hypothermia"  He then attacks Maxim's position as 
follows---


"Viewing cryonics as an experimental medical procedure does not necessarily 
commit one to the position that substantial amounts of money and resources 
should be allocated to recruiting medical professionals and expensive 
equipment."


My comment-- I can only chuckle. That position is rediculous. Maxim's 
professional experience has been extremely helpful in gaining insight into the 
SA debacle. 


Finally DeWolf gets the reader to agree with him on the "evidence based" as 
opposed to "extrapoloation based" model-- by mixing it in with something that 
everyone would agree with-- that moving to a location near a lab would be good 
idea-- to improve the rescue time. I've always maintained that idea as important
myself. It has nothing to do with DeWolf's argument though. if he believes his 
own arguement, why is he living in Oregan far from a cryonics lab? (...unless 
JSparks operation is considered more than education...?)


DeWolf seems to be trying to make several points-- and generates several 
attacks-- all hidden just beneath the surface of an otherwise reasonable 
sounding little blog piece. It's interesting to me that his comments section is 
closed. No rebuttels are allowed. Gee, I wonder why. 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=31498

Warning: This message was filtered from the daily CryoNet digest
because the poster's reputation was too low.
It thus may need to be rated.