X-Message-Number: 8146
From:  ()
Newsgroups: sci.cryonics
Subject: Re: BioTime advances
Date: 27 Apr 97 16:15:33 GMT
Message-ID: <>

References: <> 
<>


In <>  (Randy) writes:

>On Sun, 27 Apr 1997 10:59:40 +0100, John de Rivaz
><> wrote:

>>As I understand it - others may correct me - Biotime is a company engaged in 
>>research aimed at the medical establishment, but it does have cryonicsts as 
>>investors and the substantial growth in the share price has benefited the 
>>cryonics organisation(s) that are investors.

>Hmmm. I imagine association with cryonics would scare off a lot of
>investors.Do you know if startup capital was provided entirely by
>cryonicists?

	Paul Segal and his associates at Trans Time (tightly allied
with ACS until a falling out about 7 years ago) struggled for years
doing cryonics research on a shoestring budget provided by cryonicists.
In 1987 they presented a paper at a FASEB meeting describing recovery
of dogs after 30 minutes of hypothermic bloodless perfusion.  Even
though this work was not in itself particularly novel (the same having
been achieved in *humans* many years earlier), the press loved it, and
national media attention resulted.  Two companies, Cryomedical Sciences
and Biotime were formed, and approximately $10 million was raised in
non-cryonicist public stock offerings based on potential conventional 
medical applications of their blood substitute.

	Fans of Jerry Leaf's and Mike Darwin's work at Alcor during the
1980's were stunned by these developments, for Leaf and Darwin
were getting dogs back after FOUR HOURS of bloodless perfusion at the same
time Trans Time was getting 30 minutes.  But in hindsight the lesson is
clear: The best products and technogolies in the world are ultimately
worthless unless somebody sells them.  While I still question the
representations made by journalists during that initial media splash,
Segall and associates have in hindsight provided a model example of how
to take a cryonics spin-off technology and make a lot of money from it.

	Of course, the trick is not to become so distracted by the
development of the conventional medical product that cryonics
research falls by the wayside.  That difficulty is probably the biggest
disadvantage of funding cryonics research by public stock offerings.
What public shareholders want and what cryonicists want are not 
in general going to be the same thing.

 ***************************************************************************
 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=8146