X-Message-Number: 9431
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 11:32:37 -0400 (EDT)
From: Charles Platt <>
Subject: Damage to CI Patients?

On Thu, 9 Apr 1998, CryoNet wrote:

> From: P Michaels <>
> Subject: Cryonics Institute...............No Sweat!
> Fortunately I decided to go and meet these undercharging, rusty equipment
> using, pathetic un-business like incompetents.

I have never met anyone who made any of these allegations, and I have 
always made it clear (including in my first post on this current topic) 
that CI is more financially secure than other cryonics organizations. If 
you had really read my post, Mr. Michaels, you would have noticed this. 

> What now, well Charles Platt suggest we may be causing brain damage, to our
> patients, with our methods, andd when Bob Ettinger defends the CI position
> in his usual quiet and reasonable manner Mr Platt says we can't prove that
> we are not damaging our patients brains.

You are choosing to ignore the carefully itemized evidence that I
presented, and you are mischaracterizing what I said. Why is that? To me, 
it looks as if you don't have much interest in science, and would simply 
prefer to believe the statements of a man you trust. Is this correct?

> This is a major step forward in the long line of charges I've heard against
> CI, and whats more its a criticism that cannot be completely refuted
> without defrosting a patient.

Of course this is completely untrue. I already suggested several simple 
and cheap ways to monitor the progress of perfusion while it is 
occurring. Why do you deliberately ignore these suggestions?

To obtain more thorough verification, all CI has to do is run a properly
controlled, properly documented animal study using EXACTLY the same
protocol as is applied to CI patients, and publish the results. Why
bother? Because, as I have pointed out, the use of 75% (v/v) glycerol
without any gradual increase in concentration, followed by very slow
freezing, is contrary to basic and widely accepted principles of
cryobiology, and almost certainly causes severe damage. If an organization
chooses to ignore all experimental evidence of this kind, then surely the
onus is on the organization to prove that it is right while all other
scientists are wrong. 

--Charles Platt

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=9431