I ask your views on Mike Darwin's posts and the present and future of cryonics..

Eugene Leitl (eugene.leitl@lrz.uni-muenchen.de)
Fri, 1 Oct 1999 17:36:48 -0700 (PDT)

john grigg writes:

> And like Robert Moore I am confused as to which organization at this point
> offers the best services and technology. If I understood Mike Darwin
> correctly he feels that Alcor now offers the most advanced suspension
> methods. I remember when it seemed Cryocare and Biopreservation were the
> pace setters.

In case you haven't heard: right now only CI and Alcor are in business. CI's protocol, frankly, is a joke. So the choice is quite clear...

> to anyone here who is looking for guidance regarding cryonics. At present I
> find the situation somewhat confusing but with time things should become
> clearer.

The situation has changed, in a way it hasn't changed at all.

> I simply want to go with the organization that offers the most advanced form
> of suspension period as long as I can afford it with life insurance. I am
> still not sure who I want to legally oversee the care of my body. I also
> wonder where I would be safest while frozen, California?(the big one just

Right now your choice seems to be easy: Arizona. Hint: it's quake country, too.

> I think Mike Darwin is what I would call a "realisic cynic". He has been in
> the research trenches a long time and has a painfully accurate view of
> things though I am more optimistic then he is. And yet many I think have a

The problem is not just scientific/technological: it's mostly political. I don't know how you feel, but I intend to find out how bad the technical part of the problem is. If it's soluble, excellent, if it's insoluble, the more need to hurry on CR/nano/gerontology research.

> pollyana view of things when it comes to being reanimated in some future
> time where they supposedly will be able to repair ALL damage no matter how
> botched the suspension methods were!

You know, according to some people there is no such thing as information destruction. The proof? Because *you* can't *prove* there is information destruction. Excuse me, Mr. Topsy-Turvy? Who's is supposed to bear the burden of proof here?

> I would ask for feedback from those of you who read all least some of these
> posts. What do you make of Mike Darwin's posts? What do think of the

He's brutal, and that doesn't make him many friends. However, the factual nitty-gritty part of what he says is imo very real.

> current state of cryonics? Is there hope for reversible suspension even
> within twenty years? This is one of the most important topics we could ever
> discuss on this list considering the ramifications it could have for each of
> us as individuals.

Hear, hear!