X-Message-Number: 7640
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 12:37:07 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Visser leaks, ethics


Certain people have stated on Cryonet that they know the identity of the CPA
used by Olga Visser in her rat heart experiments, and other details of  her
procedure.  Siegfried Visser on Cryonet has said that there was no ethical or
authorized way they could have obtained that information. This situation, and
the response (or lack of response) to Mr. Visser’s statement, are very

One thing that disturbs me is that apparently hardly anyone on Cryonet seems
concerned about the possibility of such unethical behavior. Lots of messages
expressing concern about possible or alleged failure of the Vissers to
conform to established practice, no concern about the apparent attempted
theft of the Vissers’ intellectual property.

To a near certainty,  based on public and private information, it is clear to
me that several people with cryonics connections have been guilty of highly
unethical behavior—in essence, transmitting or receiving confidential
information, or/and attempting to exploit it by conducting research based on
that illicit knowledge. 

In one case—in a private exchange with me—one of the parties involved
ADMITTED investigating the Visser CPA, after receiving (allegedly
unsolicited) illicit information about it. This person claimed that the
investigation was not encouraging  as to the value of the Visser CPA, and the
investigation was dropped. Apparently we are to believe that, if the work had
proven encouraging, no attempt would have been made to profit from the head
start. In other words, it seems to me nearly CERTAIN that HIGHLY unethical
behavior must be attributed to several people.

Additionally, one person is almost surely involved in an even more sensitive
and disturbing matter, and a second person possibly in another aspect.

What is to be done? As far as punitive or retaliatory action is concerned, it
is hard to say. In most of these cases, the guilty parties have made
substantial contributions to cryonics, and may continue to do so, and this
must be taken into consideration. At the same time, it seems very wrong and
counterproductive to condone, or appear to condone, such behavior. It is also
dangerous to associate with, or rely upon, people who reveal this type of
character. Who wants a partner to whom you can never expose your back? 

In the worlds of politics and business, to be sure, many believe you often
have to work with untrustworthy friends or associates and even with enemies.
There is something in this, but it is expensive, as well as stressful, to
work in a relation of routine suspicion and distrust. I don’t think I want to
do that.

I have privately talked or/and corresponded with, or/and attempted to talk or
correspond with, some of these people. In any case, they all know who they
are. All have either failed to respond, explicitly refused to respond, or
responded in an unsatisfactory way.

>From these people I request private but full, and fully responsive, answers.
Continued failure to provide those answers—in a short time frame--will
 strengthen my present inclination, at the least, to change or end certain

At the moment I am speaking only for myself as an individual; later, we shall

Robert Ettinger

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=7640