>A person pays a great deal of money to Alcor to be >preserved when there is no guarantee a reanimation >will ever occur.
What, they should lie about it?
>They don't have to follow any proven scientific >standards or guidelines because none exist.
None that you know of. The best judgment is used in every case, and case studies are published (though, admittedly, not as timely as we would like...getting constantly harassed cuts down on productivity)
>They don't have to account for proper, proven, >successful storage.
Sure they do. Several independent trusts make regular visits to ensure good storage, as well as many family members who make regular trips. So long as the patient or his assignees agreed to it in advance.
>They don't have to admit to family members that anyone >might be there.
They do it all the time. Just not in cases where they are specifically required not to by contract. A relatively small fraction.
>They don't have to show any evidence as to how the >family member got there.
I'm not sure what you mean. Airline receipts?
>There is no mechanism in place to finance the >reanimation at some future date.
The Patient Care Trust is independent, and only a fraction of its income is used for mantainance. The rest is allowed to grow. At the very least, the initial capital should still be available for such expenses.
>There will never be any accountability for anything, >because anyone who knows anything in the far distant >future will be long gone. No one will be left to be >concerned for the interests of the family member.
Exactly why institutions like Alcor were developed. In the 60's people tried to do cryonics themselves, and after a couple years lost interest and thawed out the relatives. Alcor does not lose interest, because it is run by people who expect to be in the dewar themsleves someday. A bit like requiring a building engineer to live in the building he designs. It focuses the mind wonderfully.