X-Message-Number: 31847
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 14:08:41 -0700
Subject: Re: Message #31843 Cryonic suspension paid for by health insu...
From: Jeff Davis <>

On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 2:00 AM, "Robert Newport" <> wrote:

> Message #31843
> From:
> References: <>
> Subject: #31841

> Hi everyone: I do hope that one day, our suspension might be insured by
health care insurers, (whichever system is the most enlightened public or
private) as it is only a matter of time that suspension will be accepted as
a medical technology, useful in preserving life.

I agree entirely.  It would be the natural course of medical logic.
The natural extension of "Do no harm".

I believe this is feasible based on nothing more than the logic of
profit -- the logic of the superior business model.   I further
recommend that cryonicists  take the lead, as in, for example, Saul
Kent's successful nutritional supplement business.  Establish a more
pro-active, which is to say more involved,  medical insurance company.
 Have as standard practice comprehensive monitoring (and compulsory
protocol for) all health-related  activities --  diet, exercise,
stress generation/reduction, and negative health habits (smoking,
drinking, drug use, etc).  Couple this to a central focus on
PREVENTION. And then motivate the client to follow the protocol by
linking the amount of the premiums to the degree of adherence to the
protocol.  Be strict about canceling the coverage of those who fail to
achieve some minimum compliance with the protocol.  Set that bar high
(so as to keep premiums low for everyone).  Reward those who are
disciplined about keeping themselves healthy. (I assume that these
folks would be healthier than average with correspondingly lower
health-care costs.)

This is not heath care for everyone, but health care for the motivated
and disciplined.

In this hyper-rational business model/ health protocol environment,
cryonic suspension would be included as an option.  But with a twist.
If you opt for suspension, your premiums are lower.  I believe this is
more than a gimmick.  I believe this will prove to be a valid business
practice based on reduced health-care costs for those choosing
suspension as their "end stage" protocol.  (See Dr. Robert's comment
below, re the cost of conventional end stage care.)

Prospective clients would first be queried regarding their attitude re
cryonic suspension, then educated about the realities vs the pop
myths.  Then queried again.  Then the company decides whether to offer
them health insurance with or without.  The insurer makes the choice
based on an assessment of the sincerity of the client's commitment to
cryonics.  (I'm trying to avoid offering the lower cost health
coverage to those not actually interested in cryonics.  There may be a
better way to accomplish this, say requiring everyone to pay the same
and then refunding the overpayment after the client's suspension.
I'm certainly open to other ideas.)

Full disclosure:  I would like to see legalization and routine
acceptance of pre-mortem suspension based on a client's right to
choose.  In the current cultural context this is complex and
controversial, but I believe, doable.  Worst case: a client would have
to be removed to a jurisdiction where pre-mortem suspension could be
carried out without any legal offense, possibly aboard ship in
international waters.

> Of note here; while
suspension costs vary with in a few tens of thousands of dollars, end of
life care averages 250K. This would be a very big cost savings for the
health care insurance industry. Dr. Robert

There are other benefits beyond the cost savings:  Hope, shared by
family, friends, and medical care givers, for a good outcome.
Reduction if not elimination of prolonged ***END STAGE SUFFERING***.
(I've spoken with care givers, and unrelated to cryonics, they all
state unequivocally that anything that reduces end stage suffering
would be ***HUGE***.)

[Just a little note about "false hope".  I'm more than a little peeved
at those people who criticize cryonics as "giving false hope".  This
clearly is based on the prejudicial presumption that cryonics is
certain to fail, because if the outcome were to be successful, clearly
the hope would not have been false.  But setting that aside, what a
bunch of pissy little snots.  False or not, hope is hope.  False or
not hope lifts the burden of grief.  What kind of person is so
inconsiderate, arrogant, and unfeeling
that they would condemn so many people to so harsh a fate and to so
much suffering for nothing more than the emotional self-indulgence of
their own ignorance and ego?]

I would very much like to see this matter discussed in detail.

Best, Jeff Davis

 "Death is really just an engineering problem."
                   Regina Pancake

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=31847