Re: Precisions on the Martinot situation

From: JDP (jacques@dtext.com)
Date: Fri Jul 25 2003 - 09:50:29 MDT

  • Next message: John B: "Re:genetic engineering of IQ thought experiment"

    Brett Paatsch a écrit (25.7.2003/14:49) :
    > For now, imo, given the French attitude to 'social health',
    > it would be a *mistake* to argue that cryonics makes
    > sense on positive health grounds. (The "health grounds"
    > issue is a net loser, in that it is more likely that thawing
    > heads and cadivers from failed business ventures or
    > voluntary organisations or desparate do-it-yourselfers
    > are more likely to spread diseases then buried or burnt
    > ones). The event of the failed cryonic facility in the US
    > could be brought up. I'd want to have an answer to
    > that if I was the lawyer perhaps an example of a poorly
    > managed cemetary and so put the point as being about
    > management.

    No one thought of defending cryo on public health grounds, I think.
    (Though that may be grounds on which it is combatted.)

    > Are the French allowed to take out insurance?

    You can contract any insurance you like in France... You are forced to
    contract some state-managed insurances, depending on your profesionnal
    status. But you are free to contract anything you like outside of this
    of course.

    > The first decision is, Martinot as a special case to
    > "save" Martinot or Martinot as a symbol or a cause
    > that's time has come.

    Regarding the first option, I have transmitted to Rémy the doc for
    Alcor and CI, and personal messages / proposals from related people.
    So I think it is his choice.

    Regarding the second option, whether the time has come or not
    business-wise, the fact is, there will be a judgement, and a
    jurisprudence from this judgement (= there will be a tendency to
    re-judge in the same way the next cases).

    Jacques



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jul 25 2003 - 09:59:51 MDT