X-Message-Number: 3564 Date: Sun, 1 Jan 1995 11:19:13 -0500 From: Subject: CRYONICS marketing Dr. Stodolsky makes some seemlingly good points in re his suggestion that cryonics organizations should emphasize recruitment of AIDS patients. On reflection, however, I think most of them don't hold up well. He says it is not important that only around 1% of dying people are AIDS patients, that it is motivation that counts, and "if even 1% of these people went into suspension it would mean something like 30,000 yearly." Actually, only 25,188 people were reported to have died of AIDS in 1993; 1% of these would be 252. That would still be a lot by our present standards, but is such an expectation realistic? As usual, the starting point is actual experience, even if the sample is too small for confident projections. If I remember correctly, three of the present patients died of AIDS--about 6% of all cryostasis patients. Those who died of cancer or primarily of senescence are much more numerous. Further search of experience reveals--again, if memory serves--that some cryonics organizations, years back, advertised in gay publications, apparently without important results. Dr. Stodolsky suggests that reversal of senescence is a hard sell, so that old people are poor prospects. Sounds plausible, but our experience does not confirm this; we have a lot of old patients, including two at Cryonics Institute who died in their nineties. Then there is his point that, if a leading AIDS activist were frozen, this would open the flood gates for AIDS patients. Maybe--but then suspension of ANY prominent person might help a good deal. Summing up, it seems to me that there is not a good case for targeting AIDS patients more than others, as far as media messages are concerned. With respect to one-on-one direct sales efforts, however, it might be another story. If an organization has the resources for that, it might be worth a shot. Robert Ettinger Cryonics Institute Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=3564