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