X-Message-Number: 32689
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 01:43:50 +0000 (UTC)
From: Melody Maxim <>
Subject: Response to Steve Harris Message 32685

X-Message-Number: 32685
From: "sbharris1" <  >
References: <  >
Subject: Re: CryoNet #32684
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 17:40:50 -0700



STEVE HARRIS: >>Cannulation in medicine for femoral bypass is done on patients 
with a good blood pressure, and this is true even if the patient is intended to 
be cooled later. That means the arteries are pulsatile and pinkish white, the 
veins properly blue and fat with pressure, and everything looks like an anatomy 
diagram."<<


MY RESPONSE: Does Harris really believe femoral cannulations, in conventional 
medicine, are always performed on patients with "good blood pressure"? If so, he
needs to think again. Patients with "a good blood pressure" are usually 
cannulated via the right atrium and aorta. Femoral cannulations are usually 
reserved for urgent cases (such as patients undergoing cardiac arrest, who have 
little-to-no pressure), or other special cases (such as "re-do's"). Many times, 
I've seen patients who were either brought to the cath lab already in cardiac 
arrest, or who suffered cardiac arrest while undergoing procedures in the cath 
lab. I've witnessed these patients undergo femoral cannulation, so they could be
placed on a CPS device, (a portable perfusion circuit). The professionals who 
performed those cannulations, (on patients with little-to-no blood pressure), 
performed them skillfully and within minutes, unlike SA's Catherine Baldwin, who
recently hacked away on CI-95, for hours, without being able to accomplish any 
type of cannulation. (Luckily, a funeral director came along, and did it for 
her.) If Harris had to testify in a courtroom, or in front of a regulatory 
agency, medical experts would dismiss his claims that vascular surgeons would 
not be able to locate the femoral artery and vein, more easily than anyone 
currently working in cryonics, (even in a cadaver).


STEVE HARRIS: >>In cryonics, femoral cannulations are considerably more 
difficult...In such circumstances it's surprisingly hard to tell veins from 
arteries. I think most surgeons would be shocked, but I doubt that many vascular
surgeons have ever tried it...<<


MY RESPONSE: Is Harris' argument that, because femoral cannulations on patients 
with no blood pressure are "considerably more difficult," they should be 
performed by laymen who have received minimal training on pigs and/or dogs, (and
maybe a few cryonics cases), rather than by competent medical professionals who
have competently performed hundreds, or maybe thousands, of vascular 
cannulations? That's ridiculous. Harris may have trouble telling veins from 
arteries, but most vascular surgeons, (and other professionals, who may assist 
them, such as physician assistants), would not, even under the worst 
circumstances. Most vascular surgeons started with dissecting out the femoral 
vessels of cadavers, in med school, and cardiovascular surgeons are likely to 
have many experiences cannulating patients with little-to-no blood pressure, 
over the course of their careers.


It's beyond ridiculous for the leaders of cryonics organizations to keep 
defending sending unqualified persons to perform critical medical procedures. 
The three people Platt sent to the June 2007 ( CI-81) case, (something I wrote 
about, in the post Harris is responding to), were not only totally lacking in 
medical training or experience, they had no cryonics experience, and as far as I
could tell none of them had any real interest in cryonics, other than their 
paychecks. If it had not been for medical professionals leaving IV lines in 
place, they would not have been able to even administer their medications, and 
if it were not for a helpful funeral director, they would not have been able to 
perform their washout procedure, (something I believe would have been a GOOD 
thing, since SA's case report and addendum strongly indicate CI-81 (a stroke 
victim) was subjected to inappropriate perfusion pressures). Again, I ask, with 
Kent and Platt's combined 47+ years of cryonics efforts, (and the input of 
numerous "experts," like Harris), was that the best they could do??


I'm not going to take the time to dissect and refute the rest of Harris' post, 
line by line, but I think it's important to examine Harris' possible motivations
for defending Suspended Animation, and to endorse laypersons performing medical
procedures. We can't be sure who is working with Harris, at CCR, since they 
don't maintain a website, or keep the cryonics community informed about their 
activities. When I was working at SA, (where CCR was jokingly referred to as the
"Critical Care Relatives"), I was told their four staff members were Steve 
Harris, his wife, his mother-in-law, and the mother-in-law's significant other. 
According to LEF's Form 990's, Critical Care Rearch (CCR) received $984,500 in 
2008; $840,000 in 2007; $770,000 in 2006; $700,000 in 2005; $911,500 in 2004; 
$569,917 in 2003; and $770,000 in 2002. That's a total in excess of $5.5M, over 
the course of seven years, and I think it would be safe to assume at least half 
of that went toward the salaries (along with associated taxes and benefits), of 
CCR's staff. I haven't seen anything very impressive come out of CCR, 
considering the time and money that has been invested, there, and I have 
concerns, regarding their dog experiments. (See links, below.)


When I first started criticizing certain cryonics activities, (specifically 
those at SA, where I had been an employee), Steve Harris, (who didn't even know 
me), posted numerous blatant lies about me, and my work at SA, (which he had no 
firsthand knowledge of), on the Internet. (Both SA and CCR are funded by LEF.) 
When I asked him to apologize, he responded with, "So, sue me, baby." He didn't 
apologize, but Charles Platt who was working with him at the time, (and who was 
the obvious source of the lies posted by Harris), did. Approximately two years 
later, after the Johnson book was published, and Alcor needed to appear in a 
more positive light, Harris did issue an apology, claiming he thought he had 
already done so. In his apology, he stated he wanted to know the truth about the
secondhand lies he had posted, so I offered to enlighten him, if he would email
me, privately. He never bothered to contact me, so I tend to think his apology 
was insincere, especially considering the timing.


According to former Riverside County Coroner's Investigator, Alan Kunzman, Steve
Harris is a physician who signed multiple copies of a death certificate for 
Dora Kent, which falsely stated she died in a residence, when she died at an 
Alcor facility, in an industrial park. Kunzman maintains that Harris admitted to
knowing the documents he signed were inaccurate, and only defended himself by 
claiming he didn't bother to read the documents, stating he had just signed what
he was asked to sign, (presumably by someone associated with Alcor).


Harris, and others, have claimed the 200mg dose of propofol, in Alcor and SA's 
medications protocols, is for the purpose of "keeping people dead." 200mg of 
propofol isn't enough to keep an average-sized person unconscious, for more than
a few minutes, much less dead. When I pointed this out, Harris publicly 
recommended SA and Alcor include an additional dose of propofol, to administer 
to people undergoing stabilization procedures who showed "signs of awareness." 
Signs of awareness are signs of life, and I believe that administering a dose of
propofol to such a person, and then continuing to cool them to a point, where 
they will stay dead, probably meets the definition of an illegal euthanasia. It 
was extremely foolish of Steve Harris, (Alcor's Chief Medical Advisor), to make 
such a recommendation, especially given past accusations, made against Alcor. 
It's also inappropriate for Harris to be willing to place such a drug in the 
hands of laypersons who, (as far as he knows), could have issues with substance 
abuse, or be engaged in criminal activities. Most medical professionals working 
in hospitals would never be allowed to have access to propofol, yet Harris 
doesn't seem to have any qualms about making it available to laypersons he knows
little-to-nothing about.


STEVE HARRIS: >>Nobody could afford (medical professionals for cryonics standby,
stabilization and transport), even if they could find three surgeons willing to
travel for a week at a moment's notice, and then sit at some hotel doing 
shiftwork someplace else. SA has had exactly that problem. It remains unsolved; 
for the money available, it may continue to remain at least partly unsolvable.<<


That's absurd. No one needs to send three surgeons to a cryonics stabilization 
procedure; they only need one person capable of competently performing a 
cannulation, one person capable of safely performing perfusion, and a couple 
assistants. Out of the thousands of competent medical professionals capable of 
performing vascular cannulations, I'm sure there are people who would love to 
have one of those LEF-funded salaries and benefits packages, and who wouldn't 
mind living in sunny Florida, (especially considering they would probably only 
get called out for a few cases a year). CCR's budget, alone, would be able to 
support the competent professionals I've been suggesting. Combine that with SA's
budget, and cryonics organizations could have quite a few competent care 
providers, (maybe two working full-time, (taking on administrative duties), and 
quite a few "semi-retirees" on call). I think Harris, and some of his peers, 
have a vested interest in making sure most of the people they advise are laymen,
(people who won't know to object to any of the equipment, protocols, or 
research projects). Without a doubt, he and some of his peers have played roles 
in establishing the poor public image of cryonics.

Please see the links, below.

Melody Maxim



Some of Steve Harris' Internet posts: 
http://cryomedical.blogspot.com/2008/03/sas-new-director.html


Steve Harris on use of propofol: 
http://cryomedical.blogspot.com/2010/03/steve-harris-md-drops-bombshell-on-cold.html


CCR's dog experiments: 
http://cryomedical.blogspot.com/2009/03/critical-care-research-incs-ccrs-dogs.html


CCR's lack of progress in liquid ventilation: 
http://cryomedical.blogspot.com/2007/12/progress-or-empty-promises.html


Harris et. al.'s sloppy patent work: 
http://cryomedical.blogspot.com/2010/03/patents-in-cryonics.html

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32689