X-Message-Number: 9835
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 10:54:03 -0400
From: Thomas Donaldson <>
Subject: CryoNet #9822 - #9830

Well! Welcome, John Clark, to the club. Your donation will be useful, as
are all the others. And I, just like the other donors, hope fervently
that this work will lead to provable revivability of brains.

To Saul Kent:
Sorry, Saul, but I think that the only thing that will happen if you,
I, or anyone else decides to think seriously about reanimation expenses
right now is that we will fool ourselves, and the real scenario at 
some point in the future will be quite different from any we had
imagined.

I will also point out that whatever money was paid to Alcor for suspension
was paid freely. Socialism occurs when those with money are FORCED to pay,
not when they choose to pay. 

You do raise a valid point on the issue of how people with future
improved suspensions may feel about those who preceded them (and seriously
there are ALWAYS going to be unfortunates who simply don't get the
best available treatment at the time, even if they could afford it. Lots
of things can go wrong). Ultimately I would strongly suggest that we
structure cryonics somewhat like insurance. Sure, I may pay X so 
much just in case my house burns down, and it may seem that if my 
house doesn't burn down I've just put out useless money. I was paying
to avoid some possibilities, not for anything concrete.

So if we can really estimate the cost of revival, then it makes sense
for me to pay an average cost in advance, since even if very advvanced
methods EXIST, I may not be able to take advantage of them. I will also
add that when I joined Alcor, I felt that it was an obligation of 
membership --- not a heavy obligation but an obligation still --- to
see that those frozen before me were cared for indefinitely, so long
as the funding they provided for suspension did not run out. In return,
I expected the same consideration.

If a poor suspension meant that I could only be revived 300 years in
the future, then so be it. And in that case, as I said in my last
message, we wait until not only we know how to revive someone, but
we know how to revive them USING THE FUNDS THEY HAVE PROVIDED FOR
THEIR SUSPENSION. This is not nearly as hard as it may seem. For 
instance, your case of "what if there must be several tries" should
not occur unless the cryonics society is being really stupid. First
we work out the condition of the proposed revivee. Then, using animal
experiments, we test our methods repeatedly to assure ourselves that
they will work (as you know, we will probably be able to make animals
with physiologies virtually identical to our own, by suitable genetic
transfer and engineering --- that's already being done, when they
use rats with a human immune system to study such things as AIDS).
No matter how someone was preserved, we need not bring them back
in a hurry, we can test and test so that in the end we don't simply
bring them back, but bring them back in the best possible condition,
with some money left over, too.

Cryonics gives us something very valuable: TIME. We don't throw 
someone away just because we can't imagine how to revive them. We wait.
And if we do know how to revive someone, but as an injured person 
with no money and no future, WAIT. We don't even have to experiment
on patients. Just test animals, and WAIT. If we seriously realize
just how long patients can remain suspended, then when we come to
revive someone that patient will not only be revived but revived
very well. And not only that, but inexpensively too.

So it takes 100 years to revive me. What's 100 years?

			Best wishes and long long life to all,

				Thomas Donaldson

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=9835