X-Message-Number: 9732
Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 09:32:39 -0400 (EDT)
From: Charles Platt <>
Subject: List of Problems

On Mon, 18 May 1998, Thomas Donaldson wrote:

> Admittedly we can promise nothing with present suspension methods.
> BUT if we argue for suspension as a means to cure a presently incurable
> disease, especially a disease which AT THAT TIME no one has a clue as
> to how to cure, then we can still promise nothing. And if the suspension
> method is reversible, then we raise the possibility that they might be
> awakened in a far future by strangers who STILL cannot help them.

As I understand this, you're saying that improved cryopreservation methods
would not resolve two other problems that are inherent in the concept of
cryonics. 

This is true. But why should it dissuade us from addressing the first
problem on the list? Presumably, any reduction in the number of unsolved
problems would encourage wider acceptance of cryonics. And this wider
acceptance would help to resolve another of the problems you mention: the
uncertainty about who resuscitates cryonics patients. With a much larger
membership base, a cryonics organization begins to look (and maybe act)
like an insurance company, rather than a tiny special-interest group. 

So, I believe successful research would knock down two problems out of 
three. This sounds promising.

I note that the other two problems you mention can't be addressed right
now. So, we might as well concentrate on the problem that can be
addressed: better cryopreservation. 

--Charles Platt
CryoCare

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=9732