X-Message-Number: 7508
From: Brian Wowk <>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 22:44:31 -0600
Subject: PR vs. Research

	If we define "PR" as the generic promotion of cryonics,
then obviously there is no conflict between PR and research.  But
that is not the issue.  The issue is the *kind* of PR that
cryonics has traditionally engaged in, and how well that PR
serves the health of cryonics.

	Let me be specific.  The standard party line of cryonics
for the past ten years (which I helped promulgate) has been:

	* Freezing is a way to stop biological time.

	* Freezing produces injuries that are not reversible today.

	* But future technology can fix injuries that are not
          reversible today, so cryonics is worth doing.

	* We also do (largely unspecified) research to
          improve the quality of freezing when we can.

The most extreme version of this paradigm is the belief 
that nanotechnology is both "necessary and sufficient" for
revival of cryonics patients.  Or the belief that research
is redundant because no significant advances are possible
before nanotechnology comes.  (These precise sentiments have
been expressed publicly and privately by cryonics leaders in
recent years.)

	Steve Bridge has indicated that research does not
have a higher profile in cryonics because there is a 
shortage of researchers interested in cryonics.  I submit
that there is a shortage of researchers interested in
cryonics BECAUSE research does not have a higher profile
in cryonics.  When our primary promotional angle is the
information theoretic criterion for death, and the
computational power of nanotechnology to infer correct
structure, we should not be surprised that the ranks of
cryonics become swelled with computer scientists and thin
with biologists.

	For the next ten years, it would be interesting to  
try a strategy something like the following:

	* Deep cooling is a way to stop biological time.

	* Deep cooling without freezing is possible in
	  theory (and may in fact be demonstrated on whole
	  humans within the next year).

	* Perfecting this process for the central
          nervous system is a fascinating problem of
	  chemistry/physiology that will have
	  enormous impact on medicine in the 
	  21st century.

	* As we continue to perfect suspended animation,
          we will make our best technologies available
	  to dying patients who wish to speculate that
	  nanotechnology might be able to make the
          process work for them.

In short, I am suggesting that the whole paradigm of cryonics
promotion be shifted from an emphasis on future technology  
to an emphasis on communicating the potential of making cryonics 
work TODAY.  No more telling people to sign up (especially elderly
and dying people) because nanotechnology might make cryonics
work for them.  No more telling people about the flawed
worldview of cryobiologists and other biologists critical
of cryonics.  No more complaining that the rest of the world
doesn't understand the future.

	None of this is in any way intended to diminish the
invaluable contributions of people like Eric Drexler and
Ralph Merkle in making cryonics more credible (or of Bob
Ettinger for the powerful idea that unperfected cryonics is
worth doing).  However I am becoming increasingly uncomfortable
with the intimate association between cryonics and esoteric
future technology.  The image of cryonics as speculation on
way-out far-future technogy, instead of near-term goal-directed
science, has cost us enormously in terms of respectability
and appeal to biomedical scientists.    

	By conventional standards of medical research funding,
we are an infinitesimal distance away from having cryonics
technologies that DEMONSTRABLY WORK.  We need a greater 
emphasis on the specifics of why this is so, and to deliver
these specifics with a flourish that will inspire the people
and resources needed to get the job done.

***************************************************************************
Brian Wowk          CryoCare Foundation               1-800-TOP-CARE
President           Human Cryopreservation Services   
   http://www.cryocare.org/cryocare/

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=7508