X-Message-Number: 6974
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 96 19:18:31
From: Steve Bridge <>
Subject: Competition, Visser research
To CryoNet
>From Steve Bridge, Alcor
September 24, 1996
In reply to: Message #6965
From: Peter Merel <>
Subject: Reply to Steve Bridge
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 22:10:59 +1000 (EST)
>. My comments were specifically directed to developments that are
>funded by donation - if they are funded this way, then I don't see
>why they should not wind up largely in the public domain, perhaps
>protected by some kind of "copyleft" scheme a la GNU. The inventors
>would already have been rewarded by the donations.
I haven't looked at this very deeply, Peter, and don't begin to
understand the secondary implications; however, something doesn't
feel right about it. Maybe it is just hanging around with so many
libertarians. OTOH, libertarians don't particularly LIKE the
concept of non-profits anyway, so they might not think of an
non-profit corporation as having some special rights as an
"inventor". Anyway, at this time it doesn't seem practical.
> I guess the nightmare for anyone contemplating suspension at this time
> is that they'll be faced with two orgs, each of which owns some
> technique or resource crucial to a good suspension, and neither willing
> to license it to the other.
I think it is likely that, unless one group is already extremely
small and weak, pressure by each groups member's (who are likely to
care much less about politics than about their own suspensions -- and
rightly so) will bring about negotiations. But that would be an
extremely rough situation for ME, were I still President of one of
the groups.
> I guess what I was thinking was that a CC customer might employ the CC
> structures for management of funds and advocacy, while leaving the
> suspension and storage to Alcor - similar to the CC/CI combo.
I don't see any way to make that happen right now.
> Of course I'm only speaking as a potential client - it's not for me to tell
anyone how to
> run their business.
Being a potential client is important and makes us pay attention
to you. But when our clients are divided into several camps
*themselves* about what policies are best, as a Director and
President I have to try to decide which ideas are best for the
long-term protection of the Patients and for survival of Alcor. It
means that no one cryonics organization is likely to have everything
you want (unless we form one organization per each member), and you
have to choose which will do the best for you right now.
Next, in reply to: Message #6966
From: (Randy Smith)
Subject: SCI.CRYONICS Alcor & Visser demo on AP
Wire
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 13:56:29 GMT
> The story on demo of Visser method at ALcor is positive and leans to
> "gee whiz."
>
> I'm curious about why Boorstein showed a surprising lack of a nose for
> the salacious story on her part, considering she is writing for AP.
> How was she convinced to not mention neuro? Her attitude to Alcor &
> cryonics verges on respectful, again surprising. Or is she other than
> disinterested in cryonics?
Michelle had already written a general cryonics story on Alcor,
with some contact with Bob Ettinger, also. We needed some
suggestions on what AP might do with an inside story on the Visser
work and we needed those answers on a holiday weekend -- but I had
her home phone number. So we asked her if AP was interested in
witnessing the experiment. Few reporters invited to be *an insider*
on something like this are going to turn it into an opportunity for
dirt. They want more scoops in the future.
But it probably goes further than that. It is interesting to
see that very few reporters today look to write a salacious or
sarcastic article about cryonics. Part of that may be our office,
with pictures of many cryonics patients -- real people, with stories
and families. And of course they meet us, nice, interesting people.
Once you humanize cryonics, it makes it hard for a reporter to look
at it in such a negative light. They may not think it will *work,*
but they admire us for trying to buck the odds.
And in reply to: Message #6968
From:
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 11:56:56 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Alcor's new position
> I want to ask a very simple question. Is Alcor going to support Olga
> Visser's research. Yes or no. Please do not give me a politician's
> amswer. Just YES or NO. Then I will know to return to perma frost burial
> or not.
First, Alcor and Cryonics Institute have already *begun*
supporting Mrs. Visser's research by paying her for the cryonics
rights to it. She can now use those funds to further advance her own
work.
There are many different plans being discussed as to what
combination of donors, investors, cryonics companies, etc., might be
put together to do the work on the cryonics applications of Visser's
discoveries. We cannot negotiate those plans on CryoNet. That will
be done privately. But yes, Alcor and CI, at minimum (and probably
there be more than the minimum), will support research into the
Visser discovery.
Note that this is no guarantee that the Visser discovery will
directly lead to better suspensions. There is much research to be
done. However, I am confident that *at least* the renewed interest
in cryobiology research (which seems to be bubbling up) and renewed
interest in supporting research in cryonics (which is coming from a
combination of the Prometheus Project and the Visser experiments) are
bound to lead to huge differences in patient treatments over the next
five years.
Steve
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=6974