....And BTW I revisited those Dixon figures once more. -140 does indeed seem like a great goal to shoot for. It might not be enough for those who can't get prompt treatment after death. But I don't know that those people would be candidates for vitrification anyway....seems as though I read that vascular considerations mandate pretty quick treatment following the pronouncement of death for vitrification to be applicable(?). For the person who is fortunate enough to begin suspension immediately after cessation of vital functions, vitrification and -140 would seem to offer the several centuries timeline that I was advocating for in another post, WRT my more pessimistic scenarios.
The main downside I guess is that ITS--at least as viewed through the prism of 2004--is more complicated to maintain and could leave the suspendee more vulnerable to social/economic upheavals.