X-Message-Number: 8758
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 1997 07:39:29 -0500 (EST)
From: Charles Platt <>
Subject: Research and Budget Issues

Jim Yount says: 
> I have heard people say this before, but I haven't seen much in the way of 
> collaborating evidence that "real growth" was after ENGINES of CREATION. 
If you graph the membership at Alcor per year (Alcor being the largest
organization and most oriented toward technical improvement in cryonics
during the 1980s) you see linear growth before ENGINES OF CREATION,
followed by a steepening growth CURVE following publication. It's quite
dramatic.

Jim continues:
> There are now (perhaps) 1,000 people enrolled to be suspended at death, and
> something over 70 people in suspension.  In 1976 there were (my estimate)
> about 100 people enrolled, and perhaps 15 people in suspension.  With or
> without ENGINES OF CREATION, that is not much growth.

On the contrary, it is 10-fold growth. Moreover I believe it mostly
occurred not from 1976 to 1997, but from 1980 to 1990. The absolute
numbers are not impressive, but the RATE is high, and does coincide with
ENGINES OF CREATION. Also, a survey that I did in the late 1980s indicated
that ENGINES OF CREATION had attracted a new class of member: people in
the computer business for whom nanotechnology seemed a very comprehensible
concept. Therefore I feel there is strong circumstantial evidence that any
technical improvement which makes cryonics seem more plausible will
enhance growth dramatically. 
______

Re budget-balancing: first it is important to remember that tax-exempt
organizations cannot operate on a "fee-for-service" basis without
jeopardizing their status. It would be somewhat risky to view cryonics as
a business in this sense, so long as it is run on a tax-exempt basis. 

Secondly, Fred Chamberlain writes:
> When Jerry Leaf was suspended in 1991, and when Mike Darwin left Alcor
> about the same time to start an independent research lab, Alcor
> continued to maintain its capability only with great difficulty,

Mike was of course encouraged to leave Alcor, and the suspension team that
was formed after his departure told me that they could do as good a job,
or better, without him. If difficulties arose after that, surely the
gradual reduction in participation of those new team members is much more
relevant. It seems odd to hold Mike responsible for this. 
_____

To Thomas Donaldson: You really don't believe that cryonics will
necessarily attract more members when reversible cryopreservation is
documented? Every conversation I have ever had with a skeptic focuses on
the fact that "cryonics doesn't work yet, does it?" to which I have to
reply, "No." At that point, most people lose interest. At the very least,
reversible cryopreservation would enable me to hold their interest.
_____

To David Brandt-Erichsen: I don't think anyone else has thanked you for
your constant flow of updates about Oregon's assisted-suicide law. It's a
bad feature of the net that people who "merely" provide useful information
often receive no thanks. In fact I find your updates extremely valuable
and I believe many other people do, also. I hope you can continue to keep
us informed. 
_____

Steve Jackson:
> signing up will be a no-brainer 
Nice, Steve. I'll use that line somewhere....

--Charles Platt

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=8758