X-Message-Number: 6892
Date:  Thu, 12 Sep 96 22:37:03 
From: Steve Bridge <>
Subject: Alcor/CI "vs" Prometheus

To CryoNet
>From Steve Bridge
September 12, 1996

Re: several postings on September 12, 1996.

     Being on my third 12-hour day in a row (and tonight is looking 
like 14), I lack energy and time to fully reply to all of the 
questions.  But a couple of general comments.

     There seems to be hints that the Alcor/CI agreement was hatched 
in order to compete with Prometheus.  Nothing could be further from 
the truth.  We had been having discussions with the Vissers for 
several weeks before Paul made his surprise announcement about the 
Prometheus Project.  We DID see this as a possible competition for 
funds from our members (not the same thing as a direct competition); 
but that is the case anywhere in research.  It's no big deal to argue 
about.

     I think the Prometheus Project should go forward, and perhaps 
the Visser work (which is ready for some significant research to be 
done this very month, if we had some more funding) will help create 
even more excitement for cryonics research in general.   The local 
business people at my Optimist Club and the people who stopped me in 
the grocery store tonight (following an article in the local paper 
and a TV appearance) seemed to be excited.  How can all of our 
members be less so?

     Yes, there is a competition between cryonics groups for members 
and technology.  Sure, CI and Alcor are in competition with CryoCare, 
ACS, ICF, and Trans Time -- and with each other.  That doesn't mean I 
want CryoCare or CI or any of the others to fold up.  *Good* 
competition creates more members in general.

     Similarly, I don't want Prometheus to go away.  There are a 
thousand new things to learn about cryonics.  It is crazy to try to 
work on only two of them.  I think people should contribute to both 
projects and many others.  Maybe several of us should compete to see 
how many millions we can raise in general for cryonics research.  Why 
do people have to see this as strictly a closed market of a few 
million dollars that only one project can get or direct?

Charles Platt said: 

> I am quite bemused by Bob Ettinger's seeming assumption that this is an 
> "either/or" proposition with one group of people on one side, another 
> group on another side, and a big gap in between. 

     I don't believe Bob makes any such assumption.  In fact, Bob has 
been more open about his research than anyone else in cryonics during 
the past few years, and progressively so. 

     I regret we cannot give a lot of details about the Visser 
experiments yet, but we have *agreed* not to do so until Mrs. Visser's 
paper is published.  After that we will enter into the speculation 
and discussion with everyone else.  This is no different than various 
privileged information Mike Darwin (for example) has had to hold over 
the past several years until appropriate steps were completed.  I don't see 
why people seem to be upset over this.  The entire story will come 
out in a few weeks.

     Steve Bridge



Stephen Bridge, President ()

Alcor Life Extension Foundation
Non-profit cryonic suspension services since 1972.
7895 E. Acoma Dr., Suite 110, Scottsdale AZ 85260-6916
Phone (602) 922-9013  (800) 367-2228   FAX (602) 922-9027
 for general requests
http://www.alcor.org


Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=6892