I often wonder how our society came to have the position it takes regarding the rights of individuals after death is pronounced. Namely, no rights at all. The same rights an Alcor member has now, but I digress. Back to the subject, the next of kin can decide the fate of the disposal of your body and brain, and they seem most places to be able to do it without regard to your expressed wishes, should they choose to do so. Some protection appears to be afforded if you are a whole body specimen donated under the UAGA, but that is about it.

Now to a bit of hypocrisy. Cryonics organizations have historically accepted "last minute cases" where the next of kin decides their loving Stan or Mildred should be cryopreserved, and often without any regard to what Stan or Mildred have expressed as their wishes prior to their demise. These are the same cryonics organizations who go into hissy fits when a next of kin decides they want their loved one buried or cremated, instead of cryopreserved as they had previously arranged for.

IMHO, both of the above perspectives and scenarios are entirely wrong - morally and ethically - and should be so legally. Cryonics organizations should adopt firm policies: No patients accepted who have not personally signed an application. No patients accepted unless fully funded like other members of the cryo organization are expected to be. Period. No Exceptions, celebrity or otherwise.

Sadly, instead of discussion of the above basic important issue, we hear stories about one cryonics organization whose top leaders recently spent nearly an hour in a meeting trying to decide whether to accept as a patient somebody's dead relative who had actually been buried in the ground for several months! Not just hypocrisy, folks -- a total lack of perspective and focus on what cryonics should be about. Which is: A chance to extend life for those who clearly want it and have made their own arrangements in advance for it.

Get real,

FD

Am I recalling the past correctly here?

This is why I have long said that you are not a cryonicist at all, but instead a detractor.

I believe you are right, unperson. I believe FD and I began posting around the same time. I believe around the time of the Ted Williams debacle. The only difference between FD and me, is the fact that I am a cryonicist.

I am wondering if the Ted Williams issue prompted Jon to develop Cold Filter? I think he came around the same time. I have been watching the freeted.com website rather closely. There have been some additions to the site within the last couple of months, including video. I wonder if TWrelated could provide us some feedback as too the accuracy of some of the websites content?

I think I began reading cryonet a few years before the TW situation. The TW affair did popularize Potvin's Cryonics Cafe, but I believe I had stumbled upon it before then. Not sure when I first posted, but I think I did use my real name. I'm definitely not anti-cryonics, btw. As I've said before, I'm currently not signed up because my pre-existing condition precludes insurance.

I haven't studied the site, but the opening page is certainly inaccurate. TW saw no combat service during WWII, in fact, stayed stateside as a flight instructor once he graduated flying school himself. He did fly 39 (I believe) combat missions in Korea, including being hit by enemy fire, losing all hydraulics, radio and controls, returning to base and crash landing with no landing gear.

Rounder Books recently published an indepth profile of TW's military career, including mission by mission descriptions from Korea and numerous pictures, stories and quotes from other Marines he served with.

TWrelated. How accurate is the rest of that website?

BJ's objection to cryonics and the presentation of the "greasy" note are accurate. As I understand it, a handwritten note can't take precedent over an official will in Florida, so yes, somebody dropped the ball. The "greasy" note was never accepted in a court of law, only by the executor of the estate. Given enough money it's thought TW could be freed on those grounds, but nobody has that kind of money.

The rest? I don't know anything about Dora Kent; I haven't read any of the fictional accounts of cryonics. There are published photos of TW and family, documents from the TW case, internet news articles and videos from the time which I assume are as more or less accurate as anything else you read in the paper.

Larry Johnson claimed the TW freezing was botched in the Sports Illustrated article: Alcor claims it was the finest procedure they ever performed. I imagine the accuracy of that is somewhere between those two extremes.

I doubt anyone here wants to rehash any of this...

Thanks for your assessment TWrelated. You never know what's fact or fiction when it comes to the TW ordeal.

You say I am not a cryonicist because: You think it was the ted williams case that prompted me to post on cryonics forums.

Perhaps you would be willing to explain how if that were true, it proves your slanderous allegation at me?

The fact is, though, that I started posting under the handle "Finance Department" when I learned that Alcor extended illegal credit to a relative of Ted Williams for the cryo services to Ted Williams, who never even signed an application for such service, and that Alcor was trying to cover it up. Before that, I posted on a lot of other things under other handles, which you do not and will not know about, unperson. One of them I have mentioned before and will remind you of, though, is "Non E. Moose" used extensively on early Potvin N54 forums and possibly some here.

So the basis you claim to use for your non sequitur conclusion is not only baseless, but also untrue.

Perhaps it is, though, that you really think I am not a cryonicist because: I think that cryonics organizations should behave in an ethical manner, with respect to the wishes of the deceased, in a manner that will protect the organizations from public criticism of their practices, and in a fair and equal manner to all of their members.

That of course, proves just the opposite of my "not being a cryonicist" but by now, un, we know you will say just about anything.

Or maybe you merely wished to flame me again, gosh darn, my ears are burning.

FD

P.S. It could well be that I am not the same kind of cryonicist that unperson is. It may be all in how you define the term. If cryonicist = potential or actual customer, interested in cryonics, that's me. If it = true believer devoted to fav org which can do no wrong, that's not me, that's unperson

I like you. You're funny. And smart!

But you're not signed up as a cryonicist. You have said that many times before.

I was simply remarking that the TW situation prompted some people to start posting here. I think you are one of those people.

And yes, I do have some doubts as to whether you are actually in favor of cryonics AT ALL. You have never really resolved those doubts for me.

And you are under no obligation to resolve any doubts for anyone. I don't think that you should be banned from posting here, or anything of that nature.
I like to read your posts. You're funny and smart.

So just unclench, please.

Most people who need cryopreservation have enough lead time to get paperwork and finances in place first. Those who don't usually suffer some form of accidental early death. The only reason I see to sign up for cryonics until shortly before you know you will need it, is to cover accidents, provided that your organization's standby/transport services are worth buying.

The readiness state of cryonics organizations in that regard today, gives me little reason to want to sign with any of them.

I believe that situation will improve over time, that organizations will use medically competent staff for standbys, staff who are also capable of doing field vitrification procedures. Until then, my signature will not be placed on the bottom line.

Let's see which organization meets my standards first.

FD

I'm enrolling, and arranging funding with, a provider at this time.

I hope that, a few weeks shy of my 44th birthday, I'm not too early.

I'm doing it now, because I don't know what's going to happen if I wait.

Someone suggested that I wait 20 or so years before enrolling.

It doesn't make sense.

By enrolling now, I have peace of mind by having my arrangements secured now, and I can put money toward the organization for research, treatment and revival efforts.

Hi Bill,

Obviously your chosen cryonics company is pleased with you because you have made their job a lot easier. By signing on before you even need the service, you are giving them a vote of confidence that what they are doing right now is the proper level of service to provide. You are giving them no challenge at all to improve those services to a level that is reasonably acceptable, before you sign on. I choose to do otherwise.

It could also turn out that a few years from now one or more companies other than the one you signed up with, offer much superior service to yours. If you proceed with your decision now, don't fall into the trap of any "life memberships". I know of one company that has many such members, who are kinda locked in, so to speak.

Cheers,

FD

I signed up ASAP, because I did not want to risk higher insurance premiums if I waited (I'm lucky to be able to carry my group policy, which is portable).

Do you see any new groups forming on the horizon?

Bill, I'm sure you're bright enough to figure out that you can take out an insurance policy without joining a cryonics organization. They are two very separate matters, and only become the same when you make the cryonics org the beneficiary or owner of the policy. I have an insurance policy also, with the beneficiary temporarily designated as a favorite worthy charity, pending my seeing in the future a cryonics org that is worthy.

If you want my guess on "new groups" by which I surmise you mean cryonics orgs or businesses, I'd say "There has to be something better than what we have now."

FD

I'm not taking any chances.

If someone else comes along with better service, I might change.

I'm not going to risk going into dissolution waiting for the proverbial "something better" to come along.

If there are only one or two lifeboats available, albeit not perfect in form or function, would you rather wait and risk getting killed (flood, fire, etc.), or are you willing to get on board?

Remember, being in a cryostat is not the worst thing that could happen to you.

I appreciate your point of view though, Bill. The cryonics organizations do need people to support them, and that's you. Even worse though, they need people who will stand up and tell them what needs fixed.

FD

Just as a practical matter, it makes sense to sign up with one of the available providers asap. Death is not a slowly sinking ship, it can be quick and unpredictable.

I just conferred with my attorney yestreday and signed appropriate papers for my cryopreservation.

It's not a pleasant thing to do, but it must be done.

I don't know what some people's issues are, but if they want to take their chances and wait, that's their problem.

There are issues with every provider.

Does that mean that paople like FD should wait?

I've been working on my arrangements since December, and still have a few papers to sign.

I chose one full-service provider, because it appeared to be superior to another.

The insurance carrier to whom I applied for my term ploicy turned me down because of some minor issues, so I had to use my group policy and adjust some other financial papers before going with another cryonics group.

Anyone could go at any time.

I'm not risking dissolution, simply because everything is not just right at this time.

"Just as a practical matter, it makes sense to sign up with one of the available providers asap. Death is not a slowly sinking ship, it can be quick and unpredictable."

CF Mod: could you please use "deanimiation" instead?

Terms like deanimation just strike me as hokey and can sound a bit cultish to newcomers. I prefer to call it what it is: legal, clinical death. By current standards, the cryopreserved bodies are dead. The important point to note is that life and death is a continuum, not a pair of binary states.

... the readiness state of standby providers were a lot improved in quality, to serve the "quick and unpredictable" situation. When I see an organization with topnotch equipment, a professional medical staff, and the ability to bring field vitrification to the signed up member, my name will be on the dotted line. Until then, the chances of what is out there being worth much are IMO very very poor.

How about this: Sign up with both Alcor, and with CI/SA, and arrange the funding so that whichever one gets there first, gets the money. Now there's a thought. (Seriously, an unworkable idea, but I thought I'd interject a little humor here, my first paragraph above being totally serious.)

FD

you see, in order to exist, cryonics providers must have customers. But if we all took your advice, no one would sign up for years (until they are terminal). But until then, the cryonics companies would have NO REVENUES. No revenues equals no company ....Finance Department. And so when the first prospective cryonics patient finally decides to sign up...years ago, when he is terminal, there will be NO COMPANY in existence to take his signup.

Where did your get your business degree, FD? From the back of a matchbook?

CI doesn't require the huge dues payments each year that Alcor does, yet it is still around and seems to be functioning fine. (This is not intended as an endorsement of CI; merely instead a rebuttal of unperson's argument.)