X-Message-Number: 3285
From: Ralph Merkle <>
Subject: CRYONICS: CryoCare, CryoSpan and CI
Date: 	Tue, 18 Oct 1994 10:52:11 PDT

In an earlier post I suggested that CryoCare members should seriously
consider the option of storage at CI (an option that should soon be
available.  Previously, the only option was storage with CryoSpan).
Paul Wakfer, the president of CryoSpan, requested that I give the
reasons why this might be worthwhile.

We should have more information when the arrangements between CryoCare
and CI are finalized.  Generally, however, CI has significant financial
strength; has a much longer operating history; need not be concerned about
seismic risk; should provide better insulation against any possible risks
associated with the suspension process because of its greater distance
geographically, politically and organizationally from BioPreservation
(which often does suspensions for CryoCare members); and need not
deal with California bureaucrats.

While these various issues can be discussed in greater detail it would
appear that CryoSpan is generally at a disadvantage.  I am not a member
of either CI or CryoSpan: I'm sure the principals will have more
information.

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=3285