X-Message-Number: 32457
Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2010 09:11:49 -0800 (PST)
From: david pizer <>
Subject: Some cryonicists just don't underestand.


The reason this debate is important is that it illustrates the downplaying of 
the disastrous public relations policy of cryonics companies in (as the public 
sees it) cutting off people's heads.
 

My good friend Mike (Dr,) Perry has responded to my Cryonet post in another 
forum.  I am replying to him in that forum and on Cryonet where I originated the
discussion.  Below are Mike's comments and my responses.
 

UNKNOWN WROTE:   Please see the two messages that David Pizer wrote in the 
attached CryoNet digest. I think he has a good idea here regarding cryonics.  
(ORIGINAL MESSAGES FROM PIZER DELETED)


MIKE PERRY SAID:  With due respect for others' opinions I am opposed to 
eliminating the neuro option. I think that the long-term storage cost advantage 
of neuro over whole body is substantial (10 neuros will fit in the same size 
storage container as one whole body) and the negative publicity is overrated.


PIZER'S RESPONSE:  Mike gives no actual figures of the difference in cost.  He 
just says 10 heads will fit in the same container as a whole body.  This is a 
way of misleading the reader into thinking that doing a "Neuro" suspension only 
costs 1/10 that of a whole body.  Nothing could be further than the truth.  Most
of the cost of doing a suspension (as I pointed out in my original posing and 
Mike conveniently overlooked) is in keeping the organization going to be there 
at suspension time, and in doing the standby and other costs.  The storage is 
not that big of the overall cost of either a Neuro or Whole Body suspension.
 

AND, the attorney fees and roadblocks thrown up in Alcor's face, because the 
public detests Neuros, adds much more than the savings of a Neuro suspension to 
the over all costs of doing cryonics and Alcor staying in business  (just look 
at Alcor's annual costs of hiring consultants and attorneys, and other related 
expenses each year).  


ALSO, doing Neuros causes the relatives of Alcor members to cause the members to
cancel their membership.  This leads to lost patients - those members who quit 
us every year in droves would have become patients some day.  We lost and they 
lost - thanks to public perception of Neuro Option!

Mike says: "... the negative publicity is overrated."  


Pizer: I have talked to thousands of individuals and groups on cryonics over the
years and Mike is just plain *DEAD* wrong.   People won't always tell a 
cryonicists, to his face, that they detest Neuros, so a while ago when we were 
speaking to groups we let the audience fill out cards after the talk (without 
revealing their identity) about what they thought of our talk and cryonics in 
general and they detest Neuros.  It is the single one thing that turns them 
against cryonics and against Alcor!


MIKE SAID:   (Storage costs are not the entire cost of long-term patient 
maintenance, but still quite a significant part.) TW strictly speaking was not a
neuro. His whole body was preserved but in two parts. At the time of his 
cryopreservation Alcor had a vitrification protocol that required cephalic 
isolation (removing the head) to access the vasculature so the brain could be 
vitrified. It was either do that or accept a by-then substandard 
cryopreservation, the old kind with glycerol perfusion, not vitrification, if 
the whole body was perfused intact. Since this time Alcor has developed a 
protocol in which the whole body can be vitrified so that cephalic isolation is 
no longer required.

PIZER:  Come on Mike!  EVERYONE Knew that TW's head was removed.  


 That is what turned most of the public against Alcor in this case - not the 
 fact that we suspended him!


MIKE: the negative publicity is overrated., no neuropreservation has ever 
terminated. No lawsuit has ever been instigated *because* someone was preserved 
as a neuro rather than whole body. 


PIZER:  Hundred of Alcor memberships have been canceled over the years.  I 
believe it is because (in some/many cases) the relatives of the member hate 
Alcor so much - mainly because the are sicken by the Neuro option that we offer.
(In other cases, I believe, it is because the relatives know if the member 
cancels "they" can get the proceeds of the funding vehicle.)
 

MIKE:  The failure to consider the neuro option in the early days was, in my 
estimation, a major factor in the loss of patients that occurred. Time after 
time a whole body case would be abandoned rather than converted into lower-cost 
neuro. As for the negative publicity today, yes, neuro seems creepy to some 
people but can also make people think about what is really important about 
cryonics--preserving g the brain above all else. If we want to be rational we 
should allow this option. It can also be emphasized that nobody *requires* that 
someone sign up for neuro, you can go whole body if you choose (and can afford 
it).


PIZER:  The "major" factor was the cryonics company in question ran out of 
money, good judgment and support from the relatives of the patients.  


Plus they were not set up like Alcor, They took suspensions on credit where 
Alcor solved that problem by requiring full payment up front. 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32457