X-Message-Number: 32627 Subject: Re: CryoNet #32618 - #32625 From: David Stodolsky <> Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 10:48:32 +0200 References: <> On 14 Jun 2010, at 11:00 AM, CryoNet wrote: > At some point, the professional will realize he/she is not going to make any headway and will either; (a) decide the patients are "dead already," and keep collecting a healthy paycheck, while not having to do more than a few cases a year; (b) walk away and never look back, or (c) walk away in disgust and attempt to make the public aware of what they have witnessed. > Without the cooperation and support of medical professionals, cryonics will continue to be excluded from scientific societies, and regarded as quackery by most professionals and the public. The most ethical professional will choose C. And the bad press generated from option C makes things worse. > Mr. Platt also writes that "...promoting cryonics is extremely difficult, mainly because, almost anyone can see that cryonics doesn't work yet." The real problem is that anyone familiar with existing equipment and procedures, related to hypothermic procedures, can see that it's unlikely to EVER work, given the amateur nature of the equipment and personnel. By comparison, "suspending" someone for a period of an hour, should be relatively simple, shouldn't it? By that, I mean a company trying to suspend people for decades, or centuries, should certainly be capable of performing hypothermic procedures, which were perfected decades ago, should they not? Yet, what would happen, if we were to substitute Alcor and/or SA staff members and equipment for what would normally be found in open-heart procedures? Would approximately 96% of their patients survive, as in conventional medicine? Given what I've seen, my bet would be 100% would die. It's absurd to think people who can't even begin to match given technology, which has existed for decades, can surpass it. Platt himself can look forward to a decades out-of-date suspension. Then he will have a really long time in suspension, which could be put to an end by a religious fanatic with a few hand grenades or an overzealous politician looking for votes. Without substantial growth, cryonics will remain vulnerable to these types of attack. I guess Bertrand Russell had it right when he said, "Some people would rather die than think...." > Mainly, however, for many years I have tried to influence people > not to look for magic mass marketing solutions, but to keep on doing what > we know works somewhat, namely, working patiently and lovingly with your > own relatives and friends. Working patiently and lovingly with your own relatives and friends is part of the "mass marketing" solution I have proposed. > I could cite lots > of complaints about him, but what's the point? He apparently has the ear > and confidence of Kent and Faloon, with plenty of funding, so if he ever > finds a better approach presumably we'll know about it. If a single individual is in a position to impede progress in suspension and marketing, undermine the reputation of the Movement by self-serving and dishonest behavior, and there is nothing that can be done about it, then the future of cryonics is not good, to say the least. People who are dishonest, end up believing their own lies. Therefore, the chance of him finding a better approach is slim. In his ideologically driven universe, the right answers are obvious, no need to listen to anyone else, including the public that cryonics organizations hope to serve. If the figures we have recently seen are correct, then an industry association that could make everyone aware of the waste that is occurring would be worth about a million a year to the Movement. > > As I have said repeatedly in recent years, progress is slow but membership > and patient numbers have been accelerating, The sign up rate is constant in absolute numbers, which means a decline, since growth rates are always calculated from the size of the current population. > There are those, such as myself, > who feel that a revived cryopreserved mammal is the first essential > step. Survey results show that revival of a mammal would have little, if any, effect on sign ups. > There are others who feel that since cryonics makes sense for > them, it must make sense for other people, too. Alas this ignores the > fact (very obvious if one attends any meeting of cryonicists) that > almost all people who sign up for cryonics are far from the center of > most bell curves. This is like a bus company, that only gets one of a thousand potential customers, interviewing the ones that do take the bus to find out why most people aren't using the bus. Good luck, you will need it. > Their outlook is not in any way typical. You simply cannot generalize from this > specific. This view indicates a continuation of the failed marketing approach I mentioned. It assumes all the ineffective strategies: > 'Customers are the problem' > 'Marketing research has a limited role', > 'Customers are treated as a mass', > 'Competition is ignored', > The [cryonics] organization's mission is seen as inherently good The marketing strategy of cryonics is shown to be a failure and no one is even acknowledging the situation. Looks like many more years of stagnation, at best. dss David Stodolsky Skype: davidstodolsky Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32627