X-Message-Number: 838 Date: 21 May 92 00:47:32 EDT From: Thomas Donaldson <> Subject: Re: cryonics: #831 - #833 Hi again. I have some sympathy for the statement, whether by KQB or someone else, [ Bob Smart gets the credit for his thoughtful post - KQB ] that Alcor material looks too "slick". I refer particularly to the latest version of CRYONICS: REACHING FOR TOMORROW. In my own experience I tried once to get a bookstore to carry it and they refused; after reading it while trying to think like an outsider I believe I can see why. It's interesting that CRYONICS (the magazine) is much less slick and seemed to be quite acceptable to the very same bookstore. CRYONICS, of course, tells all about our failures and goof-ups, as well as our successes. And it contains debates on cryonics matters. I hope that this is taken into account by the next revision of CRYONICS: REACHING FOR TOMORROW. (I personally would be willing to take on that job --- but I'm not sure I'd be accepted). As someone who came to cryonics before the current nanotechnology craze, I may have a different perspective than some. And in fact, I am among those who contributed to early ideas about repair, and so ended up being cited in Drexler's first book. Personally, I don't see cryonics as depending on any particular technology, so much as it depends on an understanding of two issues. One is how very minor even "major" freezing and ischemia damage are, when looked at in terms of the structure (rather than ongoing ability to function) of a patient. The other is a simple observation: it is absurd to believe that our medical technology, or even our medical understanding, has reached such a complete understanding that any sane person could honestly say that suspended people would NEVER be repaired. And after all, the worst we face if we arrange to be suspended is a POSSIBLE death, while if we do not we face a CERTAIN death. This bargain seems very much in favor of cryonics. Best and long life to everyone, Thomas Donaldson Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=838