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