Cryonics Magazine 1998-1

Cryonics • 1st Qtr, 19982

>To: [email protected]

I wanted to comment on the ar-ticle in Cryonics about the suspen-sion of Mr. Cannon [3rd Qtr ‘97 —ed.] because ever since I read Maninto Superman 8 years ago I’ve beenthinking about psychology-relatedissues in regard to cryonics andtranshumanism, and wondering whythere’s not more discussion of them.(Of course, I’ve been in Japan forthe past four years, so I’m com-pletely out of touch...)

My comment is that a cryonicsera will require a new type of psy-chology, and even now, people inorder to accept or live with cryonicsneed one as well — that is to say, acompletely different way of peoplethinking about their role in life andwhat it means to be human. I get theimpression that most cryonics advo-cates think it’s merely a matter ofconvincing people that life is worthliving and that the technology is athand, but I disagree. People for thepast million years have been condi-

tioned to look at their life in termsof limits or stages. I don’t know ifthere is a term for the psychology ofhow people perceive the future, butI think few people are able to “see”or “feel” more than ten or twentyyears into the future (and that’s push-ing it). The further off from one’scurrent life stage, the more disasso-ciated the future feels. That’s whyyoung people feel immortal, becausethe future, in the sense of “70 yearsfrom now” is inconceivable to them.Likewise, a person in his 80s facestwo scenarios: one, the stages of lifehave “successfully” conditioned himto accept death (almost as a matterof behavioural conditioning), or two,suddenly he feels panic and depres-sion. People, however, have beenconditioned for thousands of yearsto compensate by imagining (or be-lieving in) a spiritual immortality(i.e. denial of death).

Now, preparing people (in par-ticular, our children) to think in moreextropian terms, we need to create anew life span psychology. I haven’t

Plenty of people receiveCryonics Magazine , but

how many actually read it any-more?

I’m not sure. Only on rareoccasions does Cryonics re-ceive correspondence. I couldinterpret this as a general feel-ing of satisfaction from sub-scribers, or I could call it “post-literate apathy.” At one timeor another I’ve been temptedto publish something really out-rageous and inappropriate, justto see how many of you arepaying attention.

Before we reach that point,however, I’d be interested inhearing your opinions about myfirst year as editor of this maga-zine. Would you like to see mecontinue with my efforts tobring in more contributors fromoutside Alcor? How do youfeel about the various columns?Do you enjoy the usual mix-ture of articles, or would youprefer something more fo-cused? What have I done thatyou like, what have I done thatyou don’t like, and whathaven’t I done that you wouldlike? Write me a letter or sendme email. Make your voiceheard, and help me put (ormaintain) Cryonics Magazineon the right track.

And please don’t forget tokeep those articles coming.

Thanks!

3 1st Qtr, 1998 • Cryonics

formulated it yet, but obviously, itwould have to involve a first andsecond life. The first (pre-cryonics)life we must see as a stage of devel-opment, a fetal stage, in which welearn to choose between life anddeath, and define the value of lifeand our dreams of the future. Thesecond would be a transitional (post-freezer era, era of nano-technology)one in which the struggle for trulyindefinite extension begins and theconflict between humanity andtranshumanity will ensue (issue ofidentity). A third and final stagewould occur when man makes thechange into Ettinger’s superman; nodoubt though, that era too will befaced with countless problems.

I think many immortalists, forexample, at one stage or another willsuffer from varying forms of doubtand depression. Counselors willprobably have to teach them how tofind purpose by envisioning a “cre-ative evolution” and determininghow they will use new technologiesto reshape themselves and find anew purpose and enjoyment in life.I imagine, for example, a world inwhich people will be entertained byvery lucid virtual realities. A personmight purchase a program whichwill make him feel like he’s in 20thcentury NY, and even perceive hav-ing a human body again. He couldchoose between full awareness(awareness that he’s living in thefuture and acting out a fantasy),semi-awareness, or time-limitedamnesia. People who still had a hu-man frame of mind would be livingin the past, and psychologists wouldhave to help them define themselvesin terms of the future so individualscould continue to grow and evolveand face the final fight, the so called“Omega Point” which might raise asense of anxiety and futility in some

or antipathy and opposition in oth-ers.

Of course, that’s rather far off.For the time being, people need anew way of seeing and definingthemselves. One element in this is afirm belief that the solution to all ofMan’s questions are within humangrasp and just a matter of time away.A second element is that states ofmind are temporary and we must becareful not to let decisions of themoment hinder our future. A thirdis that change is a part of life, and interms of hundreds of years (let alonethousands or millions) we must havenew perceptions of the limits ofchange, since comparatively speak-ing, as humans we’re used to theimage of time standing still, due toour limited lifespan. (Sure, thechange from 40 years ago until nowmay seem like a lot, but in the bigpicture, a person from the futurewouldn’t see much of a differenceeven in a 200 year period.)

Next, we need a new life spanpsychology, emerging from threequestions:

1) As cryonicists, how shouldwe view the purpose of our currentlife and its meaning in the long-term picture? (Must be individuallyanswered.)

2) In terms of aspirations andanxieties, how far down the roadshould our time/life paradigm be (i.e.how far into the future should wethink on a daily basis — live for themoment, plan for the near future,think in perspectives of the first lifeonly, but do a bit of planning for thefuture, or contemplate as far asomega point... etc. etc.)?

3) Given infinitely extended life,how should we redefine our pur-poses in life, and how should weprepare for the future and redefineourselves?

Another important point is therole the family will play in the fu-ture. At present we are conditionedto believe in our children as an ef-fort to “perpetuate the species,” keepa bit of us alive, even sit in as oursuccessors and replacements. JohnBradshaw made a fortune on his PBSfamily series, and that was only deal-ing with problems caused by one ortwo living generations. Now imag-ine a few hundred generations, andgreat-great-great grandpa who wasdead for a few hundred years, com-ing back for dinner (great idea for ashort story: autocratic grandpathawed out from suspension, yap-ping away at dinner and fightingwith the young ones, while theyblame him for all their genetic prob-lems and intergenerationaldysfunctionality). I think the rolethe family will play, and the wayour traditional roles and definitionsof family, will also have to be con-sidered, but sometimes I see a no-table absence of the concept of fu-ture generation families in cryonics.Another point, then (come to thinkof it) would be the effect of indi-viduals thawed out, happy to bebrought back, only to find out thattheir loved one or a child or grand-child opted not to be frozen. Howwould a transitional immortal dealwith the idea of permanant loss andwould he or she face anger, guilt oreven survivor’s guilt? And also, priorto thawing, wouldn’t a cryonaut haveto be conditioned to understand andprepare for the challenges and ob-stacles in reassimilation? Or let’s putit like this: are there a few peoplewho’ve opted for freezing who arelikely to suffer either from future

Continued on page 35


Life Scenario:You’ve just received your membership bracelet from a cryonics organization. You proudly chain this life-

saving jewelry to your wrist. . . only to realize that someone might actually see it.You haven’t told anyone close to you about your cryonics arrangements, but now you have no choice. You

invite your parents out to dinner at a fine restaurant (one with waiters; not Taco Bell or Jack-in-the-Box), and atthe most propitious moment possible (probably between the main course and dessert), you display your braceletand announce that someday a group of a friendly, dedicated, upstanding people will freeze you down to theboiling point of liquid nitrogen.

Your parents:

All cryonicists have to think about howrelatives and friends will react to news

of their cryonics arrangements. Althoughthe decision to make such arrangements isultimately yours, the cooperation of peoplearound you will affect the quality of youreventual cryonic suspension. Sooner orlater, you have to take the plunge and findout how they feel about this.

You probably noticed that the abovescenario omitted numerous reactions. Yourparents could question you about the feasi-bility of cryonics. They could shrug andadmit that what you do to yourself is yourown business. They could even congratu-late you on your courage and pioneeringspirit, then ask how they might sign up aswell.

There’s no need to cover these latterpossibilities. If your parents react withpractical or intellectual questions, you’rein good shape. Most people become in-volved with cryonics for practical or intel-lectual reasons anyway; you may or maynot convince such wonderful parents (twoof which belong to me) that they shouldmake cryonics arrangements for them-selves, but at worst you will wind up witha mild philosophical disagreement.

The painful scenarios always end in

1) “You’re going against religion (or God,Jesus, etc.)” — It seems as though I men-tion the intellectual answer to this accusa-tion in every issue of Cryonics. I won’tbore you with my reasoning again, prima-rily because there is rarely any point togiving an intellectual answer for an emo-tional question. When made in an emo-tional fashion, this statement about reli-gion means, “I feel most comfortable withold thinking habits and social customsabout death, but your plans make me feelvery uncomfortable.”

2) “You’re being taken in by a con game”— You may feel tempted to answer, “No,I’m not, because. . .” Don’t fall into thistrap; in the end, you and your tormenterwill end up bickering like children (“Yes,it is!” “No, it isn’t!” “It is!” “It isn’t!”“Is!” “Isn’t!”). This statement about “congames” raises a basic question of trust.The person who argues through such state-ments may have experienced fundamentaldisappointments in his life, or he may havedisappointed others. By questioning yourjudgment, he could be expressing lack ofconfidence in his own.

Before you join a cryonics organiza-tion, assure yourself that you trust it. Youmay not know if cryonics will work, but

How Do I Tell Mom and Dad?

by Brian Shock

powerful torrents of emotion.I’ve seen this happen again and again.

Enthusiastic young cryonicists discover, totheir astonishment and regret, that lovedones want to bully them out of their cryon-ics arrangements. Even if this hasn’t hap-pened to you yet, the possibility never quitevanishes. While you can’t really win thesearguments (because they’re not arguments— they’re someone’s brutal attempts atimposing his or her will on you), there areways to survive them.

First, you need to recognize the formand nature of these emotional haymakers.Keep in mind that a family member orfriend can phrase almost any question aboutcryonics in either an intellectual or emo-tional fashion; to weather an emotionalattack, you must first recognize it as such.Is the other person raising his voice? Is hecrying? Is he making eye contact? Asobvious as these clues may seem, acknowl-edging the other person’s emotions pro-vides you with a vital defense. Try toremember that, underneath any emotionalexterior, there may be pain, anxiety, orother feelings that have nothing to do withyou.

You may encounter some of the fol-lowing statements:

a) gasp in horrorb) scream at you incoherently

c) burst into tearsd) throw their wine in your face

e) disinherit you on the spotf) all or most of the above.


you can reasonably confirm to yourselfthat a cryonics organization will act de-pendably and ethically.

3) “This is too morbid” — In other words,“all thoughts of death terrify me.” Fear ofdeath is natural; as with all fears or anxi-eties, it becomes pathological only when itparalyzes. To some degree, anyone withsuch a profound fear suffers from an emo-tional illness. Try to remain sensitive tothis person’s weakness.

Privately, remember that society doesnot frown on pre-arrangements with con-ventional funeral parlors. (Some peopleeven applaud the personal responsibilityof such pre-arrangements!) Even non-cryonicists can acknowledge that mem-bership in a cryonics organization is littledifferent from a pre-arranged funeral.

4) “You must be mentally ill to want this”— In many cases, this is simply an intenserestatement of “This is too morbid.” (Weshould take care not to over-interpretanother’s suspicion of your mental illness;he may or may not be hinting at his ownpotential emotional instability.) However,you may also hear this type of reaction inlife-and-death situations, where people re-sist any “abnormal” measures taken dur-ing the dying process. I am aware of atleast one case where an Alcor member wasaccused of mental illness by his familyafter he attempted to make cryonics ar-rangements for a terminally ill parent.

Particularly in long-term illnesses, pa-tients and families may become enured tothe idea of death, accepting it as a bless-ing, and even feeling disappointment if itdoesn’t come. In extreme cases — such aswith Holocaust survivor, psychologist, andauthor, Elizabeth Kübler-Ross — an indi-vidual may come to “identify” with death,not dissimilarly to the way hostages mayidentify with their captors. Such individu-als would consider cryonics an interfer-ence with the “last, best experience of theirlives.”

5) “Why don’t you want to be buried withyour family?” — I must confess a certainamount of confusion about this particularargument, though I have heard it used withsome frequency. To the non-religious out-sider such as myself, it sounds as thoughsomeone believes in a special “sanctity”about the decay of corpses.

Clearly, most people do not let theirimaginations stray into the post-burial pro-

cess of deterioration. I suspect that state-ments about being “buried together” re-flect a very primitive belief that the methodof interment in this world will affect life inthe “next” world. Even today, many Judeo-Christian sects hold that the dead will some-day be resurrected, literally from theirgraves. Burial with family members wouldthen seem the best method of ensuring thatyou keep your family together in the after-life.

On the other hand, perhaps familiesburied together merely offer a more con-venient memorial location for their de-scendants.

6) “Why are you so selfish?” — We canbreak this simple statement down into sev-eral motivating sub-statements.

a) “Why don’t you leave this moneyto your family?” — The speaker considersyou selfish because you won’t leave moneyto your family. Or will you? I cannotthink of a single cryonicist who did notconsider his family’s financial security be-fore making cryonics arrangements. Thisneed be nothing more than enlightenedself interest; a deprived family might tryto obtain the funds you set aside for yoursuspension.

As with many of these other argu-ments, look to the speaker’s motivationsfor accusing you of greed. What does hewant?

b) “Why do you in particular deserveto live?” — Why are you so selfish as tobelieve that you should live when othersdie every day? Perhaps the person whouses such a statement doesn’t care aboutyou as much as you might have thought.Many people are amazed to discover thattheir parents are normal human beings,who may actually resent their children’syouth and potential.

Beyond this, someone might be ex-pressing a cryptic belief that cryonics willwork. (“Why should you live, when oth-ers I value have died?”) This person mightfeel that you are somehow devaluing orinsulting the dead by daring to live. Hemight also feel regret or guilt that othersdid not have the option of cryonics.

c) “Why do you want to embarrassyour family by doing something so differ-ent?” — You are selfish because your ac-tions may embarrass your family. This isobviously your family’s problem and notyours. If they attempt to make you feel

guilty about your cryonics arrangements,ask yourself why they feel that their stand-ing in the community is so fragile.

If anyone accuses you of selfishness,remember that emotional health alwaysbegins with valuing yourself. Recogniz-ing the similarity of oneself to others is abasic trait of all primates (monkey see,monkey do). As especially imaginativeape-descendants, we have developed thisbehavior into a profound empathy. Aninability to place a high value on ourselveslimits our ability to place a high value onothers.

Now that we have inoculated ourselvesagainst some basic emotional argumentsfrom relatives, how do we take a moreactive role in dealing with them?

First, remain calm. The strategy be-hind any emotional argument is to stripyou of your objectivity and inspire anequally emotional reaction. Rememberthat no one wins a shouting match. Today’srage can be tomorrow’s guilt; I know ofmany families who have raised the exploi-tation of guilt to an art form.

Next, think carefully before you offerrational arguments to another’s emotionaltirades. How many times have you man-aged to persuade someone lost in the throesof anger or sadness? Often, your bestaction is to politely excuse yourself fromthe room. Let the strong emotions exhaustthemselves, and try to start a discussionlater, when everyone has relaxed.

Finally, give other people time to dealwith your interest in cryonics. Don’t pushthem, don’t badger them, don’t seek outpainful confrontations. If your relativesand friends truly care about you, they willeventually come to accept your choices.You may have to do your part as well, andlearn to accept their choice to reject cryon-ics.

Of course, these methods will not workon everyone. Relatives with deep reli-gious beliefs may shun you. Those withundiagnosed anxiety disorders may findyou too horrible to bear. Those who onlytolerate you may use your cryonics ar-rangements as an excuse to condemn you.

Try to breathe deeply, relax, and geton with your life. You’ll survive. That’swhy you signed up in the first place.


Novel Excerpt:

The First Immortalby James L. Halperin

November 5, 1982

Ben sat at his office desk duringa rare lull in his work schedule; nopatients in the waiting room, no ap-pointments for the next 20 minutes,no follow-up calls needing to bemade right then. He finally had amoment to think, and what hethought was: Ben, that was dumb,dumb, dumb! He was damned luckyhe hadn’t died on that airplane.

Seven days had passed. Ben feltmuch better; still a bit sluggish, butokay. He intended to resume hiswalking that evening, coveringshorter distances at a slower pace.

First he dialed his son’s num-ber, and got the answering machine,as he had for each of the last fivedays.

He waited for the beep. “Gary,it’s me again. You out of town orjust don’t feel like talking to me?Can’t say as I’d blame you, but someforces of nature won’t be subdued,and I’m one of them. By the way, Ihappened to notice some of yourpaintings in a gallery on NewburyStreet. Had no idea paintings couldbe that expensive unless the artistwas dead. Or is that why you haven’tcalled me back? Anyway, a womanof obvious good taste was admiringthe big green one with the hum-

mingbirds and that incredible sun-set. I told her she’d better put hername on it. Didn’t mention you weremy son, of course. She finally didput down a deposit on it. You knowhow persuasive I can be. Anyway,you might as well call me back, oryou’ll have to listen to these mes-sages every goddam day for the restof your life. Well, bye for now.”

He dropped the receiver into thecradle and stared at the oak wall infront of him. Damn! He wonderedif Gary was really out, or sittinghome listening to that?

Needing to fill the time withsomething, anything, possessingsome semblance of productivity, Benlooked through a pile of papers. Hefound the note he’d written to him-self after returning from Mack’sburial, and called Arizona directoryassistance.

The Phoenix Life ExtensionFoundation had a listed phone num-ber. He reached David Perez, themembership administrator. Perezwas an articulate fellow and quitepersonable. It surprised Ben to learnthat the place was indeed a cryonicsfacility. A mild disappointment.

“You’re like that company inSacramento I read about a few yearsago?” Ben asked.

“Same concept, better execu-

tion,” Perez laughed. “You’re refer-ring to California Cryonics Limited,I assume.”

“Sounds right.”“They made some serious mis-

takes, but we think their conceptswere sound. Think of them as theTitanic; think of us as the QueenElizabeth II.”

“An apt analogy, I hope. Talk tome.”

“Over time,” Perez began, “sci-entific progress has allowed peopleto live longer. Already we estimatethat medical science is adding al-most two months to the average lifeexpectancy of each American everyyear. Eventually science will dis-cover a way for humans to have anindefinite lifespan. It’s a matter of‘when,’ not ‘if.’ But few if anypeople alive today are likely to reachthat point before being overcomeeither by disease or calamity. So forthose of us who don’t make it to thattime, the only way to survive is tohave ourselves frozen after we die.At ultra-low temperatures, all meta-bolic change virtually ceases. Theo-retically, a person’s body could bepreserved indefinitely.”

Ben remembered his conversa-tion with Epstein a dozen years ear-lier, and felt a sudden chill. Even ifit were legitimate, he couldn’t see


anyone voluntarily submitting tosuch a thing.

What if you were actually awareof being frozen—with no hope ofescape? He imagined himself lyingin a block of ice, unable to move fordecades, or centuries, but still alive.Even the hellish bowels of that Japship had been a better prospect, hedecided. As bad as that was, the

journey had been finite. Being fro-zen alive, trapped in an icy coffin,guaranteed no such redemption.

“People let you put their bodieson ice?” he asked.

“We use liquid nitrogen, actu-ally,” Perez explained. “And peopledon’t just let us, they pay us to do it!We have over a dozen people insuspension now, and 56 otherssigned up, including me. Whichmakes us the largest cryonics facil-ity in the world.”

The largest in the world? Benthought. If cryonics was really vi-able, after being available for 20years, why hadn’t more peoplesigned up? It couldn’t have just beenthe money; any possibility of an-other chance at life should have beenpriceless to a dying person.

“Of course,” Perez continued,almost as if he’d read Ben’s mind,“nobody’s ever been revived, andthere’s no proof any of us will ever

be; it’s purely theoretical. Neitherthe science nor the requisite tech-nology exists yet. Cryonics is a state-ment of hope that humankind willultimately achieve both.”

Or maybe more like an affidavitof insanity, Ben thought. He figuredhe might as well listen, though.“When I was younger, muchyounger,” he prompted, “I used to

think we’d be able to stop the agingprocess during my lifetime. ThoughtI might live forever.”

“Still might, you know. We don’tmake promises, of course, but sinceeveryone’s going to die anyway, youwouldn’t have much to lose by be-ing frozen, would you? Anyonewho’s buried or cremated will neverbe revived, but if you’re frozenquickly enough at the point of death,before all the information in yourbrain’s lost, well, who knows whatscience will be able to do in 50 or100 or 500 years?”

It was nutty, but at least Perezdidn’t seem to be lying about any-thing—so far. “What happens toyour soul when you’re on ice?”

“People always ask us that,”Perez said. “Nobody knows if there’sreally a soul separate and apart fromthe body. But I gather from yourquestion that you’re a religious man,so let’s assume you have such a soul.

And let’s say your suspension lastseven 500 years. That’s a long timefor a body, but if a soul’s eternal,it’s probably not too much to expectit to find its way home.”

“Interesting. Weird, but interest-ing.”

“And in the eyes of God, half amillennium would be insignificant,wouldn’t it? We can’t be sure, but

I’d assume your soul won’t mindcooling its heels for a lousy 500years.” Perez chuckled, the sincerelaugh of a man who believed in hisown product.

“You’re one helluva salesman,”Ben granted. “You don’t have toanswer this if you don’t want, buthow much money will they pay youif you sign me up?”

“Just my salary. Nobody heregets commission. We’re non-profit.”

“Really?”“Yes, sir.” Again Perez’s tone

conveyed the eloquence of truth.“Back in World War II,” Ben

said, “the army used to have a seri-ous problem with parachutes. Aboutone percent of ’em failed to open.Now one percent doesn’t sound likemuch, unless you happen to be oneof the unlucky fellas who got thewrong ones. But they finally solvedthe problem; got the defect rate downto zero.”

James L. Halperin is a rare-coin dealer, investor, part-time novelist, and cryonicsactivist. The First Immortal , his second novel, will be published by Ballantine inhardcover during January 1998, and is now in development as a Hallmark/CBSminiseries. Jim intends to donate all book royalties, after expenses, to various healthand education-related charities, including cryonics.

We don’t make promises, of course, but since everyone’s going to die any-way, you wouldn’t have much to lose by being frozen, would you?


“How?” Perez asked.“Simple. They made all the para-

chute packers and inspectors takemonthly jumps, using parachutes se-lected at random from those they’dworked on themselves.”

“Exactly! And our basic philoso-phy is very similar to theirs. Whatwe do here is for our own benefit asmuch as yours. Maybe we’re a littlemore trusting than the army, but notmuch. Remember how I told youI’m one of the 56 people signedup?”

“So you did.”“In fact, ‘the Phoenix’ won’t hire

anyone who doesn’t plan to take theexact same journey our memberssign up for. What’s more, I makeabout a third as much here as I didat my last job selling real estate. Iwork here because I want to helpassure my own journey into the fu-ture, and my family’s, too.”

“Well that’s somewhat reassur-ing. And you refer to your organiza-tion as the Phoenix?” Ben added.“Of Phoenix, Arizona. Was your lo-cation an accident, or intentional?”

Perez laughed. “We chose Phoe-nix because it’s one of the least likelyplaces in the United States to havean earthquake, or any other naturaldisaster for that matter. Purely a co-incidence, but an interesting one,don’t you think?”

“Very.”“Of course, once we decided to

locate here, it seemed so perfect torefer to ourselves as ‘the Phoenix.’”

“A fitting name,” Ben allowed,picturing the great bird rising fromthe ashes.

“I tend to think of us as a life-boat to the future,” Perez replied, ametaphor Ben appreciated more thanhe could have realized. “But what-ever image works best for you. Ifyou’d like to learn more, I’ll be

happy to send you our informationpackage.”

A leaky lifeboat to the futuremay be lunacy, Ben decided, butfeeding his body to the fauna waseven crazier. He gave Perez his ad-dress.

June 2, 1988

Sirens blaring, the ambulancetore through Boston Common, rush-ing Dr. Benjamin Smith to New En-gland Medical Center. Startled mo-torists pulled to one side as the three-year-old Ford transport van spedthrough traffic lights and over-wideturns. Then, with only barest hesita-tion, the drivers returned to trafficand their own daily concerns.

Both ambulance attendantswheeled him through the emergencyentrance toward intensive care. Oneof them whispered to a nurse, “Lookslike myocardial infarction. Probablymassive.”

Ben wondered if they realizedhe could hear them. He’d treatedmany terminal patients himself, andhad long sympathized with the help-lessness felt by those who were dy-ing or debilitated from illness. Theirminds often became incapacitatedalong with their bodies. Inability tocomprehend their predicament, Benhad always imagined, might be asmuch blessing as curse.

He understood that such loss offaculty was caused not only byphysiological circumstance, but alsoby feelings of helplessness and lossof control. And now, feeling thathelpless himself, he found his frus-tration worse than he could haveanticipated or understood. He triedto focus on an internal pinpoint thatwas little more than hope. He knew

his mind was clouded; he couldbarely remember his previous deci-sions, and creative thought was astruggle. Yet he’d methodically pat-terned a plan of action into his brainover the past five years:

I will show no ambivalence to-ward the freezer.

Now, even as his mind falteredand he questioned his own ability tojudge, even as his reasons for em-bracing cryonics faded like a citydisappearing into afternoon fog, hereminded himself that although hecould no longer see its edifices, theywere still there. Thus he knew hemust appear resolute. There was pre-cious little else he could do for him-self. He would just have to hopethat his own preparations were ad-equate, and entrust his destiny toothers.

A nurse looked down at his face.“Oh my God! Dr. Smith.” She didn’tknow him personally, but almostevery nurse at the hospital wouldhave recognized him. She ran along-side them. “It’s gonna be okay. We’lltake care of you, sir.”

Before surrendering conscious-ness, Ben managed to whisper thethree important words he’d longplanned to say if he ever found him-self in this situation: “Call TobyFiske.”

***Dr. Tobias Fiske arrived 40 min-

utes later, just in time to watch hisfriend open his eyes. Ben lay flat onan ICU bed, attached to monitors,hooked to an IV unit, breathing oxy-gen through a mask. Toby realizedthat Ben’s body would be helpless,virtually immobile, but his mindmight still be lucid.

“Hey, stranger. How youfeelin’?”

Looking up, Ben licked his lips.“I’m not gonna make it, am I?” he


gasped.Toby stood for several seconds,

wrestling with himself for the rightvocal timbre, the proper facial ex-pression. “Doesn’t look good.”

“How long?”“Without a transplant, a few

hours. At most.”“What about a transplant?” Ben

asked.“Nothing suitable available.

Odds of finding anything in timeare less than one percent.” Toby hadto look away from Ben while speak-ing these words.

“Oh.”“Ben, your daughters are here—

all of them. Right outside.”“Gary?” Ben asked.“Not yet.”“Okay. In a minute.” Ben closed

his eyes. “See my bracelet?” hewhispered.

Toby nodded.“Call the number.” Ben was

breathing hard now, obviouslystraining to force out everything heneeded to say. “But don’t get in...trouble for me. Promise, Toby. I’masking you... as mydoctor, not my friend.”

“I promise.”“Couldn’t love you

more... if you were...my brother.”

Toby wondered ifBen understood that tohim their kinship ex-tended far beyondbrotherhood. Throughout his ado-lescence and even adulthood, hisfeelings of disenfranchisement—feelings he now attributed to his par-ents’ blind devotion to religion andlack of devotion to each other—hadleft him open to a sort of quasi-scientific thinking far beneath hisintellectual potential. Without hisfriend’s guidance, Toby knew he

would never have pursued a careerin medicine. He might’ve wound upwriting horoscopes for a second-market newspaper. Or joined theMoonies, for God’s sake.

But he simply answered, “Iknow,” squeezed Ben’s hand,slipped the bracelet off his wrist,and walked to the door.

Outside, now in tears, Toby toldRebecca, Maxine, and Jan, “Benwants to see you.” He huggedMaxine. “His heart’s barely pump-ing. Probably only an hour or twobefore it gives out completely. Andhe knows it.” Then he trudged downthe hall to the doctor’s phone andplaced a call to the number on Ben’sbracelet.

An operator answered on the firstring. “Phoenix. Emergency re-sponse.”

***Of Ben’s three daughters,

Maxine was the physician, so theothers now looked to her withuncustomary deference. Max wouldknow best how to mask her sorrow.There would be plenty of time to

mourn later; she’d want her father’sfinal moments to be as pleasant aspossible.

“You comfortable, Daddy?” sheasked, stroking his right hand. Benfigured she must have looked at hischart, and knew he could no longerfeel his left. “Any pain?”

“Yes, plenty. But nothing hurts,”he said, forcing a half-smile, dread-

ing the freezer, now imagining claus-trophobia beyond toleration. He feltterribly weak, too.

No one knew what to say.Max forced herself to break the

silence. “Remember when you tookus all to the Grand Canyon? Must’vebeen 1962, wasn’t it?”

Ben smiled.“Of course we could never fly

anywhere, like normal families,”Rebecca said.

“I still can’t believe we did that,”Jan laughed. “All six of us in thatCadillac with those foot-tall tail finsblocking the view. No station wagonfor us! Five straight days there, andfive straight days back. It’s amazingwe didn’t kill each other.”

“And some of those motorlodges were so seedy,” Max added.“I can only imagine what causedthose stains on the bedspreads. Youand Mom in one room, and the fourof us sharing another. Rebecca and Iusually slept on the floor.”

“Yeah,” Jan said, “so you couldtalk and tell dirty jokes all nightwhile Gary and I tried to sleep. God,

I hated that.”“Those trips you

used to make us take,”Rebecca said, “y’know,Dad, I tell my friendsabout them sometimes,and they’re jealous. Theysay stuff like, ‘My par-ents never took us alongon their vacations. They’d

just ship us off to Grandma’s.’ AndI’d always tell them they were thelucky ones. But that’s—that’s nothow I really felt, not a bit.” She wasgasping now, trying hard not to cry.“Of all the things about growing upin our family, those summer vaca-tions are what I remember best. Theywere like getting to live a separatelifetime; an extra year each year. I

“See my bracelet?” he whispered.

Toby nodded.

“Call the number.”

Cryonics • 1st Qtr, 19981 0

swear I remember as much of thosevacations as I can of the years sepa-rating them.”

“Dad,” Max asked, “you wantto see your grandkids? I could ask afriend to pick them up and drivethem here.”

Ben tried to shake his head. Tearsformed. The last time they saw himwould become one of their stron-gest memories. It couldn’t be likethis. Grampas, he decided, shouldonly be recalled in a grin.

“No,” he whispered slowly, halt-ingly, “I want ’em to remember meplaying soccer with ’em, or takingthem... to the zoo. Not lying herewith a tube up my nose.” He gaspedfor air; caught his breath. “But youmake sure they know I love them.Tell those kids... my last thoughts...were about them, all of ’em, and mylast hours were happy... because Iwas thinking about them.”

Rebecca began to cry. Jan lookedaway, her own eyes welling. Butdear Max had forced herself to holdher emotions in check, like a sag-ging dam whose purpose was to givethe town below a few extra hours toevacuate before the impending flood.

“Is... Gary coming?” Ben asked.“Yes. I’m sure of it,” Rebecca

said. “He loves you, Dad. He’d behere now if he knew. I left a mes-sage on his answering machine, andcalled Vose Galleries, too. He’s sup-posed to approve the layout todayfor his one-man show next month.They’ll tell him as soon as he showsup, and he’ll come on the run.”

Picturing his son trying to runon that shortened left leg, he thought:more like on the reel. And that wasprobably Ben’s fault, too.

He whispered, “If he doesn’t gethere in time, say goodbye for me.Just tell him how proud I am of him.He really made something of him-

self.” Despite me or in spite of me?Ben wondered.

“He sure did,” Rebecca said.“In spite, I think,” Ben whis-

pered.After about half an hour, Tobywalked into the room. “Sorry to in-terrupt. The technicians from thePhoenix just arrived. They wantedme to make sure Ben knew.”

“Already?” Ben murmured.“Better talk to you in private.”Max said, “We’ll be in the hall,Dad.”

***“How’d they get here so fast?”

Ben asked.“They’re not from Arizona,”

Toby heard himself explain, as ifthis were a normal frigging conver-sation, for God’s sake. Like he wasmaybe explaining a standard medi-cal procedure; a goddam triple by-pass or something. Christ. “ThePhoenix has two scientists travelingaround the country training para-medics. They have teams on call inabout 20 cities. Your team owns anambulance company in Rhode Is-land. You’re their fourth cryonicsjob. Last one was in Warwick, sevenmonths ago.”

“They can work here?”“Yeah. They’re licensed in Mas-

sachusetts, and cleared for this hos-pital. I checked. Guess they figuredBoston being so close....” Then Tobypaused a moment, and finally saidit: “Cryonics? Jesus, Ben. Yourdaughters know?”

“No. Couldn’t figure out how totell ’em... Or you.”

“What were you afraid of? Thatwe’d think you lost your mind orsomething?”

“Well... yeah.” Ben was tryingto smile. “Don’t you... think that?”

Toby hesitated. “Out of yourmind? No. Gullible? Maybe...” He

paused again. “You really s’posethey’ll ever revive you?”

“I doubt it.” Ben chuckledweakly. “But you... never know.”

“Those three cryonic techniciansseem like believers. One of themexplained a bit of the procedure tome.”

“Good.”“Ben, you sure about this?”“Yes... positive.”“Okay, I’ll help,” Toby said.

After all, Ben was his best friend!Risk to his professional ass? To hellwith it. What was an ass worth ifyou were ashamed it was yours?“But look, if we let your diseasetake its natural course, oxygen flowto your brain’ll diminish. And that’sa problem. You’ll start losing braintissue long before your heart stops.”

Toby realized that he had saidall this almost as if it were expected,the most natural thing in the world.Yet the secondary consequenceswere obvious enough.

“I know that.” Now Ben seemedconcerned that Toby might be mov-ing too quickly, like a sinner whodiscovers God then donates everylast possession to the church.

“So what do I do?” Toby asked.“Do it by the book. Don’t jeop-

ardize... your license.”“I can give you morphine.”“That’ll put me... in respiratory

arrest.”“Probably.” Hopefully.“I’m not... in any pain.”“I know. I was just saying that if

you were.... Think about it, Ben.Maybe you’re in severe pain andhaven’t told me.”

“Don’t do it. You could get... introuble.”

“Only if I get caught.”“Isn’t worth the risk.” Ben

gasped for air. “Besides... you haveto look after Alice for me.” Deep

1 1 1st Qtr, 1998 • Cryonics

breath. “Can’t do that... fromprison.”

A joke, Toby realized. No doc-tor had actually gone to jail for help-ing a terminal patient die. But bothknew doctors who’d lost their li-censes for it.

Toby laughed quietly. “Okay,Ben. Whatever you say.” He turnedto go.

“Cryonics is a longshot. Don’trisk your career... for a longshot.”

Toby did not turn back, nor didhe answer. He wasn’t sure how hisvoice would sound right then.

***Max had been talking to Harvey

Bacon, the chief cryonic technician.She was sure that her own expres-sion was now a portrait of her dis-belief and disgust.

“You can go back in,” Toby said.“Did you know about this?” she

asked.“No. I just found out. Like you.”“Incredible,” she muttered, go-

ing back inside. To Max, cryonicswas a fraud, a waste of money. Andworse, it deprived living people ofhealthy, lifesaving organs that mightotherwise have been donated. Howcould her father have fallen for thisscam? He used to be such a realist.

***But Toby refused to play judge.

Some people spent $100,000 on theirown goddam funeral, didn’t they?Or left their money to sometelevangelist, looking to buy a placein heaven. Maybe cryonics wouldactually work. Who the hell couldknow? Ben had always been smart,even prescient, so maybe he wasright again.

***Jan and Rebecca followed Max

into the ICU.Rebecca’s reservations were

quite different from her sister’s:What would she tell Katie andGeorge? Was their grandfather deador in limbo? They’d want to knowwhat had happened to his soul. Sheknew damn well he’d never be re-vived, but he wouldn’t be at resteither—at least not in their minds.They’d never be able to let go ofhim. How could he have done thisto them?

***Financial problems had beset

Noah and Jan’s law partnership.Their practice now consisted almostexclusively of personal injury cases,which required large capital outlayagainst uncertain outcome. Nomeaningful settlements had beenforthcoming, while competition inthat field had intensified. They bothseemed to be working much harder

even as they fell farther into debt;starving hamsters on a relentlesstreadmill.

And just four days ago Jan hadlearned that she was pregnant withtheir third child, a fact she hadn’tyet revealed to anyone. Noah wouldnot be pleased with the news. Whatwould happen to all of her father’smoney? she wondered. Jan felt guiltyfor thinking it, but the thoughts stillcame: Was he going to keep it? Hecouldn’t spend it where he was go-ing, but they sure could use it. He’dnever try to take it with him, wouldhe? Damn! Noah had been right, asusual. She should’ve helped her fa-ther prepare his will.

“You’re gonna be frozen?” Maxwas saying to Ben, obviously tryingto keep a sympathetic tone to hervoice. “Why didn’t you tell us,Dad?”

“Knew you’d... try to... talk meout of it,” he whispered. “But... Ihad to... do it.... Needed to know...there’s a chance... my death... mightnot be... permanent. Any chance.”

Jan could feel her own finger-nails biting into her palm. “You can’tbe serious.”

Rebecca glared at her. Whoops.Jan said nothing more.

“I’m sorry,” Ben said.All three women began to cry

But Toby refused to play judge. Some people spent $100,000 on their owngoddam funeral, didn’t they? Or left their money to some televangelist, looking to

buy a place in heaven.

Maybe cryonics would actually work. Who the hell could know? Ben hadalways been smart, even prescient, so maybe he was right again.


again.“I never wanted to hurt you. Any

of you. I’m so sorry. I didn’t...think...”

Suddenly monitor alarms weregoing off. Then Ben’s right handlurched toward his chest.

“Oh my God,” Max gasped, run-ning out of the room, calling afterToby. “Another infarction. Comequick!”

***Now Ben’s discomfort and anxi-

ety had vanished. He felt himselfhovering near the ceiling, as if float-ing atop a swimming pool filled witha thickly saline emulsion. Belowhim, with wires and tubes attached,

was a comatose body. His body.People strode about it resolutely, buthe detected little energy emanatingfrom the body itself. He thought hesaw it—me? he wondered dazedly—still breathing, just barely. NowToby was barking instructions at thenurse, who ran out to fetch some-thing. Then Toby asked Rebecca andJan to wait outside. “But I mightneed you, Max, so stay right here,just in case.”

Max nodded.“In fact,” Toby said moments

later, “maybe you’d better go get acrash cart, just in case.”

She nodded again, and rushedout to find a nurse.

Now they were alone, just Tobyand Ben, and Toby seemed to be atthe cusp of decision; Ben could al-most feel his friend’s mind at work.

“I hope you really want this,”

Toby whispered. His hands weretrembling as he carefully removed asyringe from his pocket and covertlyinjected the contents into the porton the IV pouch. “Goodbye, Ben.You will be missed.”

Even with his mind shuttingdown, Ben understood. Morphine.

Toby called Harvey Bacon andthe rest of the Phoenix team inside.“His heart stopped beating. I’m call-ing him at 1:14 p.m. Proceed.”

Approaching footsteps re-sounded from the hall. Bacon turnedtoward the door just as Toby wassneaking the empty syringe into hispocket. Bacon’s eyes rested brieflyon the motion of Toby’s hand. Then

Max returned to the room pushing acrash cart.

“We won’t need that now,” Tobysaid to her quietly. “Ben’s gone.”

Max watched the cryonics teamset to its task, as though she’d beenexpelled as a participant in her ownlife. Her face appeared shocked, sad-dened, emotionally repulsed, butprofessionally fascinated. Her eyeswere simply following the activityof the team working over her father,as if her emotions had little mean-ing, and all she could do was watch.

Then suddenly in darkness, Benheard voices. Gary?

Ben felt himself rushing througha long tunnel, utterly serene and con-tent. He saw a beautiful white lightin the distance, and felt gladdened,eager to join with this loving light.The experience was nothing like hisshort-lived resignation to death in

1943; this time he welcomed it. Thelight beckoned him closer; he racedto meet it, no longer missing earthlyexistence or human flesh. He wasnot his parents’ child or even hischildren’s father; he was himselfalone. At last.

He couldn’t yet see his wife, butsomehow knew she was there, in-side the light, waiting to welcomehim for all eternity. Soon they wouldbe rejoined. Forever. As the lightgrew nearer, the voices from earthbecame faint, disconnected, and ul-timately irrelevant.

***Out of breath, Gary hobbled into

the ICU and saw Toby’s morose ex-

pression. “I’m too late, aren’t I?”“I’m sorry.”“Damn. Damn it all!”Three cryonic technicians were

coupling Ben to a heart-lung resus-citator and a mechanical cardiopul-monary support device. Both ma-chines were activated, and Ben’s cir-culation resumed. He began tobreathe.

Oxygen and other nutrientswould soon rekindle part of his brain.

“I order you to stop this imme-diately,” Max shouted. The threetechnicians, apparently used to suchinterference, ignored her.

“Sorry, Max,” Toby said. “Benmade an anatomical donation, willedhis body to the Phoenix. I have nolegal authority on the disposition ofBen’s remains, even if I disagreedwith his wishes. Which I don’t.”

“But we’re his family,” Rebecca

“I order you to stop this immediately,” Max shouted. The three technicians,apparently used to such interference, ignored her.


said.“So am I,” Toby answered.“Gary,” Jan said, “can’t we do

something? They’re gonna freezehim, for Chrissake!”

“Why are they doing that?” Garyasked, looking at Toby.

“It’s what he wanted. Cryonicsuspension. He thought someday wemight have the science to cure andrevive him. He knew it was alongshot, but it was his life, wasn’tit?”

Gary nodded. He thought abouthis own years in medical school, hisinternship and residency and prac-tice: precious time wasted trying toplease his father instead of himself;a mistake he would never makeagain, nor wish on anyone else.That’s right, it was the man’s ownlife, and even in death, he aloneshould decide what to do with it.

The cryonic technicians admin-istered various medications:Nimodipine, a slow calcium chan-nel blocker to help reverse ischemia.Heparin, an anticoagulant to aid cir-culation. And a tonic of free radicalinhibitors and other medications tominimize future ischemic brain dam-age. They began packing the bodyin ice.

“According to the technicians,”Toby explained to Gary, “every ten-degree drop in Celsius temperaturecuts metabolic demand in half,which slows the loss of neurons.”

Gary watched intently, sayingnothing. The technicians hoveredover Ben, exchanging clippedphrases. Gary felt an unfamiliaremotion surface. He didn’t recog-nize it until, to his astonishment, hefound himself fighting an impulseto raise his arm in salute.

***Ben felt something tugging him

back through the tunnel, away from

the light, down from the ceiling. Apowerful force, irresistible.

It made him angry.He’d seen his darling Marge’s

face, and was at the verge of meld-ing with the light surrounding her.Yet now he was back inside his body,sentient but unable to move regard-less of exertion, aware of his breath-ing, feeling the pulse of the heart-lung machine through his arteries,and experiencing all other earthlypain, fear, and grief.

Damn! Must be alive again. Howlong had he been dead? Minutes?Days? Years?

He heard his daughters’ voicesclearly, and Toby’s, and Gary’s. Hewished he could tell them to sendhim back.

They argued his fate as if he nolonger existed.

They were prepping him for thefreezer, he realized. He must havebeen gone only moments. But theywere right about one thing, he de-cided: He didn’t exist.

They were talking too fast, orperhaps his mind was operating at areduced pace. His body felt simulta-neously frozen and aflame. He ex-pended no effort; even his breathingwas performed by device. Thus thepain was endurable; real yet some-how apart from significance.

But dread overwhelmed him.As long as he was alive, suicide

was still an option. But once he wasan ice-cube, he couldn’t will him-self to die, now could he? Whyhadn’t he thought of that before?

The technicians began surgery.Ben was aware of them cutting thefemoral vessels in his groin. Theyattached a blood pump, membraneoxygenator, and some kind of heatexchanger he’d never seen before.As Ben’s brain cooled, everythingaround him seemed to move with

increasing velocity. By the time hisbody temperature had fallen to 90degrees Fahrenheit, he was a snailsurrounded by hyperactive hum-mingbirds.

Oh God, tell them to stop!The cryonic technicians were

now preparing Ben for the plane tripto the storage facility in PhoenixArizona where he knew he wouldreceive cryoprotective perfusion tominimize freezing injury to cells,and eventually be cooled to minus196°C. First they would have to re-place his blood with an organ pres-ervation solution. Then they wouldplace his body, packed in ice, into ashipping container for perhaps itsfinal flight.

A sense of panic overtook him.Was he trapped here for generationswith no possible escape? Had hemade the ultimate mistake? Wouldhe become like a Kafka character,paralyzed until the end of time?

Ben felt a scream surging fromthe core of himself; all the worsebecause he knew he could never giveit voice. Perhaps it would quiver onthe edge of his throat forever.

Then, like a rheostat diminish-ing the flow of current, his brainactivity decelerated to below thecritical level, the optic nerve con-currently deprived of blood flow.He experienced what seemed a bril-liant, transcendent moment of as-tonishing lucidity, a moment isotro-pic with respect to time; an instantor an eternity.

For reasons unknown and unim-portant to him, he recalled the wordsof Jean-Paul Sartre: And I openedmy heart to the benign indifferenceof the universe. All at once Ben un-derstood the wisdom of those wordsas no living man ever could.

The rheostat slipped into therange just a kiss above darkness.


Ben felt himself rising onceagain; to the ceiling, into the tunnel,and on into the light. The light. TheLight! The promising, the beckon-ing, the all-encompassing, beautifulLight.

March 15, 1991

[Editor’s Note: In the years follow-ing Ben’s suspension, some of hisrelatives bring a series of lawsuitswith the ultimate goal of raiding hisTrust Fund. As part of their strat-egy, they try to discredit cryonicsand have Ben removed from sus-pension.]

The afternoon deposition tookplace in Webster’s office; an accom-modation to the expert witness whohad flown in from New York City.There were no conference roomsavailable in the District Attorney’sbuilding, and Banks and Smith’smodest facility would have requiredat least an hour’s cab ride, whileFialkow, Webster, Barnes & Zeevewas barely two miles from LoganAirport.

Even so, had the request comefrom Noah Banks, Webster wouldhave told the man to go screw him-self. But Brandon Butters was a dif-ferent story. The DA’s office was abridge no intelligent lawyer wouldwish to burn.

Webster thumbed through theexpert report as he questioned itsauthor. A stenographer tapped qui-etly at her small machine. Also inattendance were Brandon Butters,Noah Banks, and Tobias Fiske, allof whom had learned to keep con-versation with the opposing side toa minimum. Toby studied his copyof the report and reviewed copiousnotes on a yellow pad of lined pa-

per.“Please state your name, age,

occupation, and credentials for therecord,” Webster began.

“Dr. Brett Wong. 49. I’m a mo-lecular biologist, with a BA fromYale, and an M.D.Ph.D. fromUCLA. I now conduct research,while teaching at Columbia Univer-sity. I’ve been a full professor forthe past six years.”

“You state in your expert reportthat Ben Smith can never be broughtback to life under any conceivablecircumstances. Is that still your con-tention?”

Wong folded both hands into hislap. “Yes, that’s correct.”

“As I read this, I see you believethat at liquid-nitrogen temperature,ice damage so corrupts cells as torender them permanently nonvi-able.”

“Yes. In many cases.”“Not all?”“No. Not even most. But far

more than a critical amount.”“Dr. Wong, could you please

describe, in the simplest terms pos-sible, what happens to a typical hu-man cell when it is so frozen?”

As the witness spoke, Tobywrote furiously on his notepad.

“Certainly,” Wong answered.“Most cells are about 90 percentwater. At minus 196 degrees Cel-sius, water will expand by roughly10 percent. It also crystallizes, whichin some cases may actually punc-ture the cell membranes. That ef-fect, however, is relatively rare.What does happen, almost uni-formly, is that ice squeezes and dis-rupts the ions and proteins of tissue,occasionally forcing them intoshrinking pockets of residual unfro-zen water. And sometimes the fab-ric of a cell itself becomes crushedinto tiny spaces among the ice crys-

tals.”“But many types of human cells

have been frozen successfully,haven’t they?”“Yes.”

“And isn’t human blood frozenroutinely?”

“Certainly. But unlike most ofour cells, red blood cells contain nonuclei. A percentage of the otherblood cells, such as lymphocytes,die in the process. But even so, fro-zen blood, once thawed, is func-tional. That wouldn’t necessarily bethe case with other organs.”

“I see.” Webster accepted a notefrom Toby, and read it. “But Dr.Fiske tells me that lengths of intes-tine have been frozen in liquid ni-trogen, thawed, and worked after-ward.”

“True. But an organ is not a liv-ing animal.”

Toby tore another page from hisnotepad, and handed it to Webster.

“What about worms and othersimple organisms that have been fro-zen and thawed without apparentharm?” the lawyer asked. “Wouldn’tthose be considered animals?”

“Well, those are much less com-plex than mammals, obviously.”

“Aren’t human embryos andsperm often frozen, then stored forlater use?”

“Yes. But long before any mam-mal is viable outside the womb, itbecomes too fragile to survive thatkind of damage. Its cells becomeinterdependent, and even small dis-ruptions in the balance will kill theorganism.”

“And I suppose the human brainis more delicate still?”

“More delicate? Depends onyour definition of the word,” Wonganswered. “Certainly brain cells arelarger than other cells, and will notnormally self-repair or regenerate.


Besides, human neurons don’t growor divide. Therefore, I believe theloss of each brain cell would be moredevastating than the loss of any othertype of cell.”

Webster read another note fromToby: “Could scientists build a sys-tem to set out modified micro-or-ganisms that might guide the neu-rons and glial cells toward their own

repair or regeneration?”“No. That’s impossible.”“Impossible?” Webster read,

“Can’t bacteria and viruses do thingsat least that complex?”

“Well, yes. But in my opinion,human beings are simply not ca-pable of achieving that level of tech-nology.”

“In your opinion. I see. Pleasetell us what is likely to happen tothis patient’s frozen cells oncethey’re thawed.”

“With the cryopreservation tech-niques that were used on Dr. Smith,I’d estimate about six percent of thecells would be completely dead uponthawing. Of the remaining cells, ifthey survived long enough, mostwould eventually revert to theirformer condition, but a certain per-centage wouldn’t.”

“What percentage?”“No one’s sure. A small per-

centage, I suspect. Maybe only afraction of one percent. But as I said,a mammalian system can toleratethe corruption of only an infinitesi-mal portion of its cells.”

Toby handed Webster anothernote.

“Tell me, Dr. Wong, how strong

is your neurology background?”Wong smiled; flattened an eye-

brow. “Strong enough. I teach acourse in neurobiology.”

“Then you must know most neu-rologists believe information in thebrain is stored in many places, witha high degree of redundancy.”

“Yes, that’s the current theory.”Webster grabbed another sheet

from Toby. “A stroke often wipesout an entire section of the brain,which can have devastating conse-quences. But if you lost, say, sevenpercent of your brain cells, spreadevenly throughout your brain, itmight not be catastrophic. Maybenot even noticeable, correct?”

“Possibly.” Wong audibly swal-lowed. “But we’re not just talkingabout losing cells. We’re talkingabout damage to living cells thatwould alter their function and dis-rupt every system in the body.”

Webster read: “Suppose technol-ogy would enable us to remove de-fective cells, keeping only thehealthy ones. Wouldn’t that giveother cells time to regenerate?”

“Nobody knows,” Wong an-swered. His eyes roamed the room.

“Then it’s conceivable, right?”“Unlikely, but possible, I sup-

pose.”

“Dr. Wong, is this cell damagewe’ve been talking about reversibleby today’s science?”

“Certainly not.”“What about tomorrow’s sci-

ence?”“It seems dubious.”Webster leaned forward. “Dubi-

ous? But not impossible?”“In my opinion: impossible. You

can’t resurrect a cow from ham-burger.”

Webster read another note fromToby: “Especially if it’s beencooked. Or eaten by worms.”

The witness laughed. Then hescrunched his mouth and shook hishead—an indulgent parent scanninga child’s second-rate report card.

“Tell me, Dr. Wong,” Websterasked. “Couldn’t you clone a cowfrom the living cells in fresh, rawhamburger? Theoretically, I mean.”

“Almost anything’s possible intheory. But remember, our DNAmodifies as we mature. Besides, toomuch free-radical damage occursover the years, even if the organismseems healthy. Therefore most ofmy colleagues and I believe that sci-entists will never be able to clone an

adult mammal.”“Never? Not even a century from

now?”“No. Not even a thousand cen-

turies from now. I’m afraid that’sall just science fiction, Mr. Webster.”

You can’t resurrect a cow from hamburger.”

“Especially if it’s been cooked. Or eaten by worms.”


(The blowing of chill winds.)

Saul Kent: I had never been toohappy about the fact that I was go-ing to die.Gillian Cummings: He died at 42;they said it was a heart attack. Theydon’t know. He had no history ofheart trouble. He’d just had his an-nual check-up — two days earlier,as a matter of fact, from his doctorhe was given a clean bill of health.Died watching a baseball game.Curtis Henderson: Dying is notthe problem — staying alive is.Saul Kent: There may be methodsin the future where you could growan identical genetic brain.Gillian Cummings: My father’slast words were: “Don’t freeze me,”and then bonk, he’s out. I wouldhave had him frozen anyway. Hedidn’t ask my permission to die.

(Chill winds blowing even moreloudly)

Saul Kent, Secretary, CryoSpanCorporation: I first got interestedin 1964 when I read RobertEttinger’s book, “The Prospect ofImmortality.” One of the principlesthat cryonics is based upon is thatdeath is not an absolute thing, it’s aprocess. We’re talking about a criti-cal stage in the process. The personhas been pronounced dead by, I pre-sume, a physician, or more than onephysician who had been involved.But what we’re saying is that thisperson is in many cases very closeto being alive and 99% of the cellsin the body may still be alive. It’sjust a matter of a condition whichmedical science at this point doesnot know how to treat. Now, if thephysician knew one more fact, hemight be able to bring that person

back to life. The key variable ofcourse is time, in that we have lackof knowledge. And what cryonicsis an attempt to do, is if the personcannot wait until the future...youknow, we bring that person into thefuture.

Curtis Henderson, president,CryoSpan Corporation: We arepreserving, now, biological materi-als like sperm, skin, and bone andsome organs, and storing them atliquid nitrogen temperature, andbringing them back and using them.In other words, they do come backto life. If you want to say they wereever dead.

You can now preserve biologi-cal material. Now, all a human be-ing is is biological material. It’strue, if you do the whole body, it’s alot more complicated. You’ve got alot more different kinds of tissue,

Tape Transcript:

“Freeze-Wait-Reanimate”transcribed by Brian Shock

While browsing a Wisconsin library’s archives, Alcor member Steve Van Sickle (whoseregular column appears later in this issue) discovered an audio tape entitled “Freeze-Wait-Reanimate.” Part of a Pacifica Tape Library educational series, this 1973 program featuredinterviews with various Cryonics Society of New York members. We know little about the originsof the program except that its producer was Jan McNeedo, with technical assistance by DavidRapkin and music by James Ursay. (My apologies for any misspelled names.)

Aside from my interest in cryonics history, I found this program fascinating because itpresented both a sharp contrast and disquieting similarity between cryonicists of 1973 and 1997.The transcription has been edited for clarity and divided into two parts. I have tried to preservea sense of the unnecessarily artsy 1970’s sound effects and audio-montage cutting. -- ed.

Part One


and that complicates the thing. Asidefrom that fact that it’s one big lump,it isn’t like blood or sperm whereyou can get at it easily. But basi-cally that’s what the whole idea is,it’s just preserving a body by thebest means we have available now,that has worked demonstrably onother biological material.

Assuming that you’ve storedyour body and it is preserved in rea-sonably good condition, what arethe chances are the future of it beingbrought back? That is somethingthat is almost impossible to calcu-late. It simply depends upon theassumption that science will con-tinue to progress, and that the as-sumption that when they do havethe ability to bring you back, thatthey even want to.

Gillian Cummings, Vice President,CryoSpan Corporation: I’d al-ways known about cryonics. But Igot into it — actually got into it —the hard way when my father died.

Of course I knew about Profes-sor Ettinger. I’d seen him on tvshows and all the rest of it. His wasthe only name I could think of, so Icalled him in Michigan, and he gaveme the name of Curtis Henderson,who was the president of the cryonicsociety here in New York, and wasalso the president of CryoSpan Cor-poration, which is actually the oper-ating arm of the Cryonics Society ofNew York. That is the organizationthat actually gets in there, rolls upits sleeves, and does the freezing.This facility that we’re in is theCryoSpan facility.

I had my father frozen simplyfor the present state of the art. Thepresent state of the art is simply topreserve the bodies. I simply couldnot go on with my own normal ex-istence thinking of my father de-

composing in the ground. Now, forthe present, cryonics can promiseonly perfect preservation. For thefuture, of course, no one knows.There’s always that hope on the ho-rizon that he may be brought back.But that was not the primary reasonI got into it. I got into it simply tokeep him preserved.

The most famous experimentwas done by a Dr. Suda in Japan,which you may have read about.He was working with cats’ brains.That really is not exactly parallel tothis situation because, first he took abrain-reading of the cat’s brain whilethe cat was alive, and he removedthe brain. I say it is not really com-parable to this situation [cryonics]because I believe the cat was alivewhen he removed the brain, so we’redealing with a different situation.But after he removed the brain, heperfused it with the same sort ofsolution we use, took the brain downto liquid nitrogen temperature whichis -315 degrees Fahrenheit. That’sthe reason it’s used; it’sso cold that all cellularaction is stopped.There’s no biological ac-tion that can take placeat that temperature, it isso low. Now he keptthis cat’s brain frozenfor, I believe, close to ayear, and then revived it.When he revived it, hetook a brain-reading ofthis brain and got almostexactly the identical trac-ing that he had when itwas in the cat. Naturallyhe didn’t put the brainback in the cat, but thatwas the most encourag-ing thing we’ve had sofar.

I believe mouse em-

bryos were frozen and brought back,and they grew up to be normal mice.So experiments are being done, butas Henderson likes to say, if therewould only be some large-scale pro-gram, something comparable, let’ssay, to the space program, wherereal research is being done with realmoney — the dirty word, money— behind it. Frankly, there’s noreason why, as much progresscouldn’t be made in this as in thespace program. I mean, Kennedysaid, “We’re going to put a man onthe Moon in ten years.” Peoplethought he was out of his mind. Butyou put the money behind it, put theeffort behind it, put the energy be-hind it, and the man was on theMoon.

(Electronic chirps and twitters, muchlike the background music in thefilm “Forbidden Planet”)

Kent: The ideal situation accord-ing to what we know now, would be[if] a person were dying in a hospi-

Saul Kent, circa 1970


tal, and there would be a team ofdoctors, or technicians that were ca-pable of handling it, there. As soonas the person’s heart stopped, hewould be put on an artificial lifesupport system. He would be main-tained on this system until the pointwas reached where the doctors de-cided that the damage is not repair-able, and then at this point you wouldadd to the system a heat exchanger,whereby the body temperaturewould start to be lowered.

See, what would happen is, inthe life-support system, the bloodpasses out through a system whichoxygenates it and adds nutrients andit goes back into the body. You canadd to the system a heat exchangerwhich it will also pass through, andthe blood temperature will be low-ered. So you would start this, and atthis point you would begin to add acertain portion of a special chemicalcryoprotective solution which wouldinvolve a base substance such asRinger’s Solution or plasma and oneor two chemicals which protectagainst freezing damage. One ofthese is glycerol. Another is DMSO.

This is the base for the chemi-cals. This would be circulated withinthe artificial system, and wouldgradually replace the blood, and thisalso would be chilled. So you’dhave the temperature being loweredfrom the inside by an increasinglycryoprotective solution. Also, ac-cording to what we believe now,you would add increasing amountsof cryoprotectant, as the tempera-ture lowered and as you went fur-ther into the perfusion. Then youwould start to cool from the outsideas well. At the time you had com-pleted the perfusion — the bloodwas out of the body and the solutionwas in — and you had reached atemperature say several degrees be-

low zero centigrade, you would thenstop. You would have to stop themachine earlier, actually, but youwould stop that phase of the treat-ment. The next thing would be topack it [the patient] in regular iceand keep it there for a certain amountof time. The next stage is into dryice, which is far colder, and the fi-nal stage would be in liquid nitro-gen. Liquid nitrogen storage wouldbe indefinite.

If we have a patient who hasbeen cooled immediately, then hehas a longer period of time beforeirreversible damage sets in. First ofall, by irreversible, we mean irre-versible by today’s standards. Thatwhich is judged to be irreversibletoday may not be judged to be irre-versible tomorrow. By tomorrow, Imay mean a hundred or a thousandyears from now, in which incrediblethings will certainly be done. Sec-ond of all, even in terms of today’sdefinition of irreversible damage, wehave a gap in knowledge. Most doc-tors that you talk to will tell you thatthere’s four or five minutes afterwhich irreversible damage sets in.This is based on a long history ofvery sound medical practice. Thisis simply that when doctors haveattempted to resuscitate patients af-ter four or five minutes without oxy-gen going to the brain, they haveeither failed, or they have been ableto and there has been brain damage.So therefore they assumed — andthis was a rational assumption —that the brain could not survive afterthis four-minute period. But yousee, recent evidence, which mostdoctors are not aware of, and whichthey hopefully will be in the nearfuture, indicates that this isn’t nec-essarily so. Rather than being espe-cially susceptible to damage, thebrain is in fact perhaps the hardiest

of organs.A fellow named Hossman and

his associates at the Max Planck In-stitute in Germany performed a veryinteresting experiment a couple yearsago. He took cat brains and he putthem in a situation at normal tem-perature, without oxygen, withoutblood circulation. He was then ableto revive these brains after more thanan hour. Apparently a most seriousproblem is that there is a separationof water from the cell solution whenice crystals are formed, and the re-maining solute is toxic to the cell.

A third problem is that there isshock caused by the change of statefrom water to ice. And a fourthproblem would be that there aregreater problems in thawing than infreezing. This is rather optimisticfor our situation, because we’re noteven presuming to thaw anybodyfor a long, long time. But there areall sorts of problems associated withthawing. It’s believed commonlythat you have to thaw very quickly.This is generally believed bycryobiologists. On the other hand,freezing is believed to be best whenit’s relatively slow.

(Water dripping in an echo cham-ber, followed by electronic chirps,rising to a thundering crescendo.)

Henderson: There are otherliquified gases that are as cold orcolder, perhaps— you can get liq-uefied oxygen, liquefied helium, liq-uefied argon, liquefied hydrogen.First of all, nitrogen is the cheapest,and it’s the most plentiful. Second,it’s relatively safe; it’s not inflam-mable. Last, it’s non toxic. You’reimmersed in gaseous nitrogen all ofyour life, walking around; air is4/5’s nitrogen. So I would say thatit’s basically because it’s inert andit’s harmless to tissue. So is helium


for that matter, but helium costsabout a hundred times as much. It’sa lot colder, and that’s the main ad-vantage.

(An electronic version of chillwinds)

Cummings: It’s a holding station,of sorts. It’s a holding station forthe future. Actually, legally, whatyou need in order to store any bio-logical specimen, and a body pre-served in this way, and when Isay preserved in this way. . .

The first step in preservinga body is perfusing it with aglycerol solution. That is, tak-ing the blood out, perfusing itwith a glycerol ringer’s solu-tion to protect the body againstfreezing damage. That is donefirst, and then the body iscooled until it reaches liquidnitrogen temperature. Other-wise, the freezing process it-self could cause a great deal ofdamage. So it is perfused andthen frozen in liquid nitrogen.Liquid nitrogen is in the cap-sule. Which, by the way, isself contained and needs noelectricity. We’re right besideit, and as you see and hear, it’sperfectly quiet. It’s just look-ing at us as we’re standing here look-ing at it.

(Cummings, in the distance.)That is actually a museum piece.

It was the, it’s a model of, well,actually it was supposed to workbut it never did. It was supposed tobe the first capsule. That was madeby a man named E. Francis Hope inArizona. All the people who werenot frozen here in this facility werefrozen by E. Francis Hope before hewent out of business in Phoenix,Arizona. The main thing wrong withthis thing — well, there were actu-

ally several things wrong with it. Itdidn’t always work. Second, it hadto be completely sealed, which hadquite a few disadvantages. First,you could not check on the bodyinside. That’s part of the inner seal,leaning against that wall. That’sanother part of the seal on the back.You were always in danger of los-ing your vacuum, and you needed avacuum pump, which depended onelectricity and that was the main fail-

ing of the thing. If we had some-thing like this working here, you’dhear it thumping and bumping inthe background. With all the powerfailures, that would be the last thinganybody would want. So there wasalways a problem with those. Whenthey got into this new type capsule,all those problems at least weresolved.

All other biological specimensare there in the small capsule, rightbeside it. It contains placenta, twobabies, which technically are bio-logical specimens. This same sort

of tank is used to contain sperm:human sperm, bull sperm, whatever.They are biological specimens. Skinis a biological specimen: hearts,lungs, etc. The transplant industry,if you can call it that, that’s growingup now is using all sorts of organs.Each of these are perfused with glyc-erol and are stored in liquid nitro-gen in exactly the same way that weuse here. Therefore, having a bodyin this way, is simply an extension

of that. It’s just a big bio-logical specimen. The rea-son it’s here is that biologicalspecimens, by nature reallyof the presence of liquid ni-trogen, means that by law itmust be in an industriallyzoned area.(Cummings, again distant.)It’s...this building. Nice,

cheerful, red-brick building.. . at least to me it seems thatway. The backdrop of theMoon, an actual photographof the Moon takes up the en-tire back wall. The reasonit’s here is that the capsulethat holds the frozen bodies(one of them happens to bemy father, and he’s in therewith another man) stands up-right, vertical, and sort of

gives the impression of being some-thing about the space program. Ifyou stand on that sort-of platformhalfway around it, you can actuallytake the lids off the capsule and lookin. This supporting platform that Ijust described looks sort of like theLEM: the lunar landing module.

We’re going to need somegloves. It’s cold up there.

Male Interviewer (probably DavidRapkin, listed for technical assis-tance in this program): We’reclimbing up on the platform which

Gillian Cummings, circa 1973(Outlook, Aug. 1973)


encircles the tube-shaped tank, inwhich — how many bodies arestored in this tank?

Cummings: There are two.

Male Interviewer: They’re upright,I assume, then.

Female Interviewer (probably JanMcNeedo, the program’s pro-ducer): What is the reason for hav-ing two people instead of one in thistank?

Cummings: Well, it’s simply themost practical way to freeze people.Two can fit in one; it’s relativelysmall. As a matter of fact, if some-one brings up the idea of space, whytake up so much room with all thesefrozen people instead of buryingthem? They’re actually consumingless of the Earth’s surface, if freez-ing would become more generalized.You’re taking up far less space put-ting two in a capsule this size thanburying two people. [Otherwise]you’re using up a lot more space.

The lid of this capsule is madein two parts. Actually the capsuleitself is, in effect, a large — 8 or 9feet tall — self-contained Thermosbottle. It works the same way.That’s if a vacuum is maintained.The top of this thing is made in twoparts, with handles that you take offhalf at a time.

(Noise of something beingopened.)

I’m lifting — or trying to lift —the first half.

There we go. . .

Male Interviewer: Those fumeswe’re looking at are liquid nitro-gen?

Cummings: [Talking about thedewar lid] It sort of looks like thecork of a Thermos bottle cut in half,the two halves of this thing on the

inside. That’s the insulation.Because the liquid nitrogen is so

cold, you’re actually seeing the va-por cloud that forms when this verycold liquid nitrogen hits the normalair temperature in this room. If youbreathe into it, it won’t do you anyharm — it’ll just create more vapor.So the idea is to take a deep breathbefore you look in.

On this side you actually see thetops of two mens’ heads. On thisside you see my father. On the otherside you see the other man who’sconsiderably shorter. You have tomove down a little bit more.

Female Interviewer: Are they in acontainer?

Cummings: No, they’re wrappedin aluminum foil. And the reasonthey’re in aluminum foil is simplyfor modesty’s sake. It doesn’t re-ally need it because by the time thebody goes into the capsule it hasalready reached liquid nitrogen tem-perature.

[According to a private expla-nation from Curtis Henderson,CSNY wrapped its patients in alu-minum foil simply because it“looked good.” —BRS]

Female Interviewer: There seemsto be a cannister here.

Cummings: The cannister containsthe placenta. There’s also a secondcannister just like that underneath.There are actually two placentas inthere, one in each cannister. Theyare to be frozen and used in futureyouth extension experiments thatsome doctor in Massachusetts hasplanned.

The idea there is that little oldladies who wish to become youngladies have gone to clinics and spentquite a lot of money on one of the

more exotic treatments, injecting theplacenta of young animals into them.Some serum is made of the placentaand injected into them. For sometime it seems that youth has beenrestored, but then the body rejects.

As I understand it, the reasonthat youth is not maintained in thesepeople is simply because their ownbodies reject the placenta becauseit’s foreign matter. Now the idea isthat, if, when you’re born, your ownplacenta can be saved for you, thenin old age a serum can be made ofyour own placenta. Because it isyours, your body will not reject it.Naturally we’ll have to wait sixty orseventy years to try it out, until oneof these people get old enough, be-cause I think the oldest is about twoyears old right now.

Male Interviewer: Kind of notmuch to see, actually.

Cummings: Would you like me totake that covering off my father’sface? We won’t see too much againbecause of this fog.

(Presumably the noise of tear-ing aluminum foil.)

Male Interviewer: Lifting the tinfoil off the top of the. . . patient.

Cummings: Actually the skin toneis perfectly natural. It’s really anamazing thing.

Female Interviewer: He looks per-fectly preserved in every respect.

Cummings: That is the whole ideaof being frozen. For the present.

Male Interviewer: There looks tobe no decomposition whatsoever.

Cummings: No, there is none. Thatis the whole idea.

Male Interviewer: How long hasyour father been in this tank?


Cummings: Almost two years. Idon’t think you or I or Jan wouldwant to look into a coffin of some-one who had been buried for twoyears, no matter how well the un-dertakers today say, “Well, youknow, we’re going to keep him pre-served with this formaldehyde,” orwhatever they pump in. I don’t thinkanyone would want to open a coffinafter two years.

(Noise, probably aluminum foilagain)

Male Interviewer: How do youfeel when you see your father’s face?

Cummings: Marvelous. Absolutelymarvelous, that I’ve done this. . .and I can come in and see him. Thatwas really the main reason. I’m afilmmaker by profession and myhome is actually California. WhatI’m doing here, I’ve been askingmyself over and over again. I justgot involved with more and morethings with cryonics, and now I’mthe vice president of the cryonicssociety here in New York. There’sone project I know that keeps mehere, and the main reason that I re-ally got into this thing so deeply ispursuing that same thing. How I dofeel? I’m trying to describe an in-describable feeling. A feeling ofelation.

The man is dead. I know he’sdead, and I probably would’ve beena basket case if I hadn’t done this,just thinking of him decomposing.But there he is, and I feel so marvel-ous that he does have this chance.No matter how remote it is, it’s stillthere on the horizon. I just felt com-pelled to give up everything and justgo around spreading the “Cold Gos-pel.”

I don’t actually foresee this be-ing widespread because of moral ob-jections. I think cowardice is an-

other, because peopledon’t want to flaunt con-vention. This is some-thing unconventional.But I do think that thereare quite a few otherpeople who might veryconceivably feel the sameway I do — have thesame sort of real, genu-ine, heartfelt, bone-mar-row feelings of goodnessand rightness for havingdone this — if they onlyknew that we existed andthat this service existed.

That technically iswhat we are: we are aservice. This is not some-thing you can hard-selllike soap, which is whywe don’t go into themoral objections if you have any.Fine, this is not for you, this is forsomeone who feels this is the way.Again, pursuant to spreading the“Cold Gospel,” I made a film on thetransfer of my father, taking himfrom the dry-ice box. (We skippedthe stage when you’re in dry ice forsome time to cool you to dry-icetemperature, and then you go intoliquid nitrogen, gradually [cooling]to liquid nitrogen temperature.) ButI made a film about it to show peoplethat there is nothing at all frighten-ing about this thing. People mayenvision going into a cold storageroom, seeing bodies hanging on meathooks. I don’t know what they thinkwhen they think of freezing bodies,of cryonics. But I made the films toshow people how unfrightening —how prosaic — it is, and to let themknow exactly what it looks like. Itwas no dummies, no simulation —it was the real thing. That’s been onquite a few TV shows. Probably themost watched was the David Frost

Show. No pun intended, that’s hisname.

Female Interviewer: Shall we putthe lid back on?

(Noise that sounds like frictionon a cork or on styrofoam — squeak-ing.)

Cummings: (sounding distracted)You never know, because it soundslike something out of Dracula’scastle.

Curtis Henderson, circa 1970

End of Part One

Look for Part Two in Cryonics Magazine,

2nd Quarter 1998


1. Off-Board Repair Scenarios

This article details an approach to“off-board repair” [1,2] for the re-animation of cryonically suspendedpatients. The variations describedbelow will serve as a brief introduc-tion.

“Off-board repair” (meaning thatrepair devices are located outsidethe patient’s body) was suggestedby Robert Ettinger in his pioneeringcryonics book, The Prospect of Im-mortality [3]. Later, Eric Drexler’sconception of repair by “assemblers”or molecular robots (i.e. “on-board”—inside the body) becamemore popular [4]. The interest inoff-board repair was stimulatedagain by the works of Ralph Merkle[1,2].

2. New Scenarios for Brain Repair

For this article, we will only ex-amine repair of the brain. The com-plete human body has about 100times the mass of the brain, and sobody repair might take roughly 100times as long. Or, if we did not wishto increase repair time, we wouldhave to increase the number of re-pair devices, decrease their size, or

increase their speed.In this particular treatment, the

brain is split into approximately1,000 (103) sections before repair be-gins. The sections are then repairedin parallel, one repair device per sec-tion. The repair device consists ofan atomic or molecular scanner, therepair computer, and an atomic ormolecular assembler.

In general the scenarios for sec-tion repair look as follows:

(1a) A section of the frozen brain isscanned to define the location andtype of all atoms within. Duringscanning, the scanned atoms are re-moved from the section (exposingthe next layer of atoms), and datadescribing their types and coordi-nates are sent to the repair com-puter.

(1b) The same as above but the lo-cation and types of macromolecules(e.g. proteins) are defined by sometype of molecular scanner. After amolecular (several atoms in depth)layer is scanned it is differentiallyremoved—molecules and parts ofmolecules (consisting of 10-100 at-oms) of different form and size (de-pending on their atomic composi-

tion) are separated from the layer bysome ablating device (mechanical,ionic, optical, acoustical) and re-moved.

(2) The repair computer processesthe data to determine an electronicimage of the section as it would bein a healthy state.

(3a) The atomic assembler rebuildsthe section from atoms, using theelectronic image of the restored sec-tion. The atomic assembler can bethe same device as the scanner, butfunctioning in a reverse process —depositing atoms instead of remov-ing them.

(3b) The same as above but using amolecular assembler that rebuilds thesection from molecules, simply plac-ing them in the necessary locations— thus there is no need to join at-oms by covalent bonds. These mol-ecules can be synthesized in vitroby methods similar to current onesused in gene engineering — i.e. out-side the repair device, in an aqueoussolution at 37°C — and then frozenand transported to the repair device(a more detailed description is givenin [2]). Molecular placement can beperformed by some “nano-arm” de-

A Cell Repair Algorithm

by Mikhail V. Soloviev


vice (e.g. an AFM-like device, simi-lar to an AFM coupled with a pro-tein molecule, proposed by Drexler[5]) .

Atomic scanning can be per-formed by an array of tiny scan-ning-tunelling microscopes (STMs)or similar devices. An element ofthe array can be an entire STM(needle and motors), or only anSTM-needle. In the latter case,movement of a large STM-platform(as proposed in [6]) provides STMpositioning.

Molecular scanning can be per-formed by an array of tiny atomicforce microscopes (AFMs) or a near-field optical microscope (NFOM)[7]. Moreover, some modificationof current electron microscopy tech-niques [8] could be used for mo-lecular scanning (possibly eliminat-ing the need for nanotechnology).One possible molecular scanningmethod, based on a future AFM tech-nique, is analyzed in Appendix 1.

Surface ablation can be effectedby the microscope itself or by othermethods: mechanical ablation, sub-limation in vacuum, ionic irradia-tion, or a combination of these tech-niques. Ionic irradiation is currentlyused in electron microscopy [8], andit provides differential removal de-pending on the atomic or molecularcompositon of the specimen.

The cell repair algorithm willwork the same way for inferring cellstructure from the protein pattern,whether the data was acquired byatomic or molecular scanning. How-ever, the algorithm will differ forprotein pattern recognition. In the

case of atomic scanning, the proteinpattern will be inferred from thecell’s atomic pattern, while for mo-lecular scanning it will be derivedfrom relief maps of cell section sur-faces. Here we will analyze only therepair algorithm for data obtainedby atomic scanning.

3. Brain Cells by Numbers

It is difficult to estimate the vol-ume of brain cells because neuralcells and associatedstructures have com-plex forms and varygreatly in size (axonsof human neurons canbe longer than 1 m[9]; diameters of theneuron body varyfrom 5 to 100 mcm[10]). If we assumethat the average lin-ear size of a neuron isabout 20 mcm andthat it has a cubic shape (20x20x20mcm), then its volume is about 104

mcm3. By various estimates the braincontains from about 1011 to 1012 neu-rons and ten times more cells ofother types (i.e. up to 1013 cells alto-gether) [2,9]. If we divide brain vol-ume (1000 cm3 or 1015 mcm3) bythese values, we obtain a range of102-104 mcm3 for the average vol-ume of a brain cell. For further cal-culations we take the latter value asa reasonable assumption; this meansthat the average brain cell contains1015 atoms (the number of atoms inthe brain (1026) divided by 1011).

If brain volume is 1000 cm3, thenthe weight of brain protein is 70

grams (calculated using data from[2]). Using this value, data aboutthe atomic composition of proteins(in weight percents) from [11] (otheradditional data taken from [6]), wecan project the following table (amuis the atomic mass unit =1.66 x 10-27 kg).

Using all these data we can cal-culate the number of atoms in thebrain’s proteins: about 6⋅1024 (6%of all brain atoms), and the average

weight of an atom in brain protein:7.12 amu.

The molecular weight of a typi-cal protein is 50,000 amu [2]. Aprotein molecule consists of about7000 atoms (many proteins consistsof more than one protein chain, butthis fact changes little in our reason-ing, and we will treat a protein as asingle unit). The average weight ofan amino acid molecule (proteinsare chains of such molecules) is 120amu [12]; it consists of about 17atoms. For convenience hereafter wewill use “protein” to mean “proteinmolecule” and “amino acid” simi-larly for “amino acid molecule.”

Mikhail Soloviev is a cryonics and life-extension advocate living in St. Petersburg,Russia. He holds the Russian equivalent of a Masters degree in biophysics from St.Petersburg State University. Mr. Soloviev has also worked with design and developmentof models for neurocomputers, molecular computers, and complex biological systems.

Table 1. Atomic composition of proteins in brain (in body)

—————————————————————— Atom Weight (amu) Atomic % Weight % —————————————————————— H 1.0 50.1 (60.6) 7 C 12.0 31.6 (10.7) 53 O 16.0 9.9 (25.7) 22 N 14.0 8.2 (2.4) 16 S 32.1 0.3 (0.1) 2


Thus the brain contains about 1021

proteins and about 3.5 x 1023 aminoacids. The average brain cell (10-11

part of the brain) has 1010 proteinsand 3.5 x 1012 amino acids.

All amino acids contain at leastone nitrogen (N) atom and manyhave more than one. The number ofN atoms in a cell is 2.4 x 1013 (de-rived from Table 1) — about 10times greater than the number ofamino acids. We can use these factsfor an amino acid recognition algo-rithm: we may start the search/rec-ognition process from the locationof an N atom. Also, we can easilyidentify the first and the last aminoacid in a protein (their structure dif-fers from that of internal amino ac-ids). This latter fact allows us toperform the protein recognition inthe following way: we find the firstamino acid of a protein, then traceall of its amino acids along the co-valent bonds between their atoms(we can recognize a covalent bondby the distance between atoms).Thus, we can recognize the proteinirrespective of its spatial orientationor 3-dimentional structure (thoughwe may need more informationabout this if some sort of damagehas broken the covalent bonds).

Some other useful facts: thereare 20 types of amino acids in pro-teins; a eukaryotic cell containsabout 3000 different types of pro-teins [13].

4. Outline ofCell Repair Algorithm

We assume the following isknown before the repair process be-gins: (a) the atomic pattern (the co-ordinates and types of all 1015 cellatoms); (b) the genome (the se-quence of nucleotides in the DNA)of the patient to be reanimated; (c)

the composition and number of smallmolecules (water, salts, acids, regu-latory molecules, etc) which are nec-essary for the cell to function; (d)every detail of cell structure andfunction.

Let us further assume that to re-pair a cell we need only know theprotein pattern (or cell skeleton), i.e.the location and type of all cell pro-teins (i.e. repair requires inferenceof the cell structure from the proteinpattern, which should be possible ifwe know every detail of cell struc-ture and function). Since we alsoknow the genome, the protein pat-tern gives us the image of the ge-nome state (which genes work andwhich do not). In general, the pro-tein pattern defines the structure ofall cell elements (or organelles:nucleus, membranes, etc), thoughthis assumption is not critical — wecan discard it and, using the samealgorithm, define the location ofnucleotides, lipids etc (but while weretain it for further development, thisadditional information can be usedfor verification of the cell structureinferred from the protein pattern).

The algorithm itself consists ofthe following steps:

(1) defining the cell’s amino acidpattern (i.e. the type, position, andorientation of all amino acids), us-ing information about the cell’satomic pattern;

(2) defining the cell’s protein pat-tern, using information about theamino acids found in step (2) (steps(1) and (2) can be combined — seebelow);

(3) inference of cell structure fromthe protein pattern obtained in step(2).

The patterns can be derivedthrough pattern recognition algo-

rithms, and inference of cell struc-ture can be achieved through sceneanalysis. Neural net computers (andhence algorithms of self-learning)could be used to realize both objec-tives. An alternative approach wouldbe logic programming by a versionof problem-oriented parallel Prolog(a language of logic programming).Processors in the repair computer,then, might be problem-oriented par-allel Prolog processors.

Cryonic suspension does not de-stroy amino acids. Recognition ofproteins, on the other hand, impliestheir repair, at least indirectly. Thisis true both for image recognitionmethods with neural processors, andfor logic programming. In the latter,tracing the amino acid skeleton of aprotein would give us the protein’slinear structure, which in turn woulddefine its three-dimensional struc-ture. We thus should be able to re-construct the protein correctly, evenif its three-dimensional structure isdamaged significantly. The inferenceof cell structure also implies its re-pair, and should be feasible even incase of severe cryopreservation dam-age. However, a great deal of re-search work will be needed to de-velop the appropriate inference andrepair methods.

5. Estimate of Repair Time andthe Number of Processors

To make such an estimate, wemust try to imagine the possible out-line of a repair program written inProlog (see Appendix 2 for details),qualitatively projecting its complex-ity. Of course, this program is farfrom being a reality; many detailsare omitted.

We can describe how the pro-gram works as follows:

(1) The program takes an atom, N,


from the list of atoms, NN, deter-mined by STM or AFM and storedin the memory of the repair com-puter. The program tries to provethat this atom belongs to the firstamino acid of a protein; if it fails, ittests the next atom, N+1, etc., untilit succeeds in finding the beginningof a protein. The program then hy-pothesizes that this amino acid be-longs to the first type of proteins,and it tries to prove this by analysisof the amino acid chain composinga protein, checking the atomic envi-ronment of each element in thechain. If this test fails, the programgoes on to test for the next type ofprotein, etc., until the type of a pro-tein is identified. After recognitionof a protein is completed, the pro-gram takes the next atom, N+1, andrepeats the above steps. The resultof this work is a list describing thetype, orientation, and location of allcell proteins (in this algorithm,amino acid pattern recognition isperformed as a part of protein pat-tern recognition).

(2) The program then tries to inferthe (repaired) structure of cell or-ganelles from the protein pattern,assuming an organelle is a protein(sub)pattern. Of course, the descrip-tion of the inference predicates mustbe elaborated (to accomplish this,we should know the precise struc-ture of each cell organelle). Theresearch for this task (the inferenceand repair of cell structure from theprotein pattern/cell skeleton) couldbe initiated with current technology(analytically or by simulation).

The execution of such a programshould be performed by a specialproblem-oriented (for cell repair)parallel Prolog processor. (This hasyet to be designed; however, ordi-nary Prolog processors have existed

since the 1980s [14].) The basic(built-in) predicates (equivalents of“command,” “operator,” or “proce-dure” in a Prolog program) wouldbe executed in one step by this pro-cessor. Parallel processing would al-low proof (execution) of severalpredicates simultaneously. In mostcases we don’t need to recogize allelements (atoms, amino acids) to rec-ognize the whole object.

Assume we need 10 steps to de-cide (by a built-in predicate) whetheran atom, N, belongs to the firstamino acid of protein. Therefore, toscan the list of NN (2.4 x 1013 at-oms) we need approximately 101 4

steps.Assume that there are about 5000

types of proteins. Though they eachhave an average of 500 amino acids,we assume that it is sufficient toanalyze 50 amino acids to recognizethe protein (i.e. on average the first50 amino acids define the type ofprotein). There are 20 types of aminoacids; their average size is 17 at-oms.

Also assume that on average weneed to analyze 50% of the alterna-tives at each level (the algorothmcould be optimized to decrease thisratio), and the recognition of oneamino acid is performed in parallelby a single step (i.e. about 100 (20/217/2) steps are executed simulta-neously). Thus we need less than105 (5000/250/2) steps to recognizeone protein, and less than 1015 stepsto recognize all 1010 proteins in thecell.

To estimate the complexity ofrecognition and repair of the cellstructure (i.e. membrane, nucleus,and other organelles) we must knowthe number of organelle types andtheir “average complexity,” the num-ber and complexity of predicatesnecessary to describe the organelle’s

protein pattern. Additional biologi-cal research and probably computa-tional experiments are needed forexact estimates. If we now assume105 steps are enough for each pro-tein to be “built” in an organelle(this seems a safe upper bound) ,then we need about 1015 steps toinfer the whole cell structure. If wereason another way, 1015 steps wouldcorrespond to the following: thereare (on average) 105 organelle typesin the cell, 105 organelles of eachtype, and 105 steps needed to inferone organelle.

Thus, we might effect cell re-pair in 1015 steps, or about one op-eration per atom in the cell.

We don’t need information aboutall the atoms in the cell (or about alltypes of atoms) to begin recognitionand repair — information about sev-eral tens of atomic layers is enough.Further, we don’t need to store in-formation about all cell amino acidsand all cell proteins. Demands onmemory storage will come from par-allel processing of several cells (seebelow). Nevertheless, in my intui-tive estimation, 1010-1012 bytes ofmemory per processor could beenough.

At the end of the next decade itis expected that processor speed willreach the order of 1012 operationsper second [15]. Let us set the thetotal requirement of repair time wewould like to achieve at 107 sec-onds, or about four months. In thislength of time, one processor canrepair 104 cells, i.e. it can guide 104

sequential repair operations involv-ing an STM or AFM, each of whichtakes 1015 steps. Each of the 1000repair devices used in parallel wouldcontain 104 processors. To repair theentire brain, we would need 107 pro-cessors.

Taking these numbers into ac-


count, it seems possible that we willhave the necessary computing powerbefore the year 2020.

Appendix 1. Scenario for AFM-based Molecular Scanning

For this scenario, we assume thata reasonable time for brain repair is107 s (about 4 months).

The brain is split into sectionsbefore repair begins. Brain volumeis about 10x10x10 cm and containsabout 1026 atoms [6]. If the numberof sections is 1000, then the sectionsize in atoms is about 1023=1026/103.If each section is 100x100x0.1 mm,then the section dimensions in at-oms are about (4.64x108) x(4.64×108) x (4.64×105) (which to-tals to 1023 atoms).

The molecular scanner is an ar-ray of tiny AFMs. (Each AFM con-sists of a needle and 3 motors toposition the needle). Possibly theAFM is the most appropiate deviceto study the fine structure of bio-logical objects, both living and fro-zen; its current resolution for solidstate matter is about the same as theSTM’s: 0.1-0.2 nm (i.e. an AFMalso can be used for atomic scan-ning). AFMs work on the followingprinciple: a tiny needle is pushedagainst the surface of some sample,and then is moved across this sur-face, maintaining a constant forcebetween needle and surface. Verti-cal coordinates of the needle are re-corded at the given AFM positionover the surface, producing a sur-face relief map. We assume thatresolution of 1 nm (about 5 atoms)is enough to recognize proteins fromdata describing a set of surface re-liefs. If the size of each AFM isabout 100x100 mcm (cf. that thelinear size of a present micro-STMis about 1 mm [16]) and a layer 1

nm in depth is removed after eachsurface scanning, then the AFM mustmake 108 scans a second to scan itspart of a section (100x100x100mcm) in 107 seconds. By compari-son, the linear dimensions of apresent-day micro-STM are aboutone mm (1000 mcm) and its scan-ning speed is about 106 per second[16]. (We assume that the surfaceablation is executed concurrentlywith the scanning, though the twooperations could be sequential.) Thearea of the AFM array is equal tothat of a section (100x100 mm), thuseach repair device contains 106

AFMs. The work of the AFM iscontrolled by a repair computer.

Appendix 2. Example of Cell Re-pair Program

The program is written in Prolog,a computer language used for logicprogramming. It does not decribehow to carry out a task, but rather,simply describes the task. This taskdescription is enough for Prolog todecide how to try to complete thetask using its internal mechanisms(or rules) of logical inference. AProlog program consists of clauses,predicates connected by the logicalconnectives: “and”, “or”, and/or “im-plication” (in the Prolog notation,written “,”, “;”, and “:-”). As a rule,“or” alternatives are written as sev-eral clauses with the identical leftpart. A predicate specifies some re-lation between its arguments (at-tributes, objects); in the Prolog no-tation these arguments are writtenin parentheses after the predicatename.

For example, the sentence:

A family is a husband and a wife ora husband and a wife and a child.

in Prolog this is written:

family(X,Y) :- husband(X), wife(Y).family(X,Y,Z) :- husband(X), wife(Y),child(Z).

where the arguments (here they maybe regarded as variables) X, Y, Z maybe persons’ names (the object iden-tifiers): Mark, Jane, Alex, etc.

Comments: (see Diagram 1)

(1) Variables: N — Structured vari-able containing data about the loca-tion of an atom, N. NN — list of N. P— structured variable containing dataabout type, location, and orientationof a protein. P contains (as its sub-part) the cursor to the atom cur-rently processed. Using this cursor,a built-in predicate (such as bondC)can get data about the atomic envi-ronment (types and locations of at-oms) of the current atom. MemA —structured variable (like “frame”)containing data about a membranecomponent. [] — empty list. [N|NN]— means the separation of a list to itsfirst element and the rest of the list.

(2) Predicates: cell — the goal predi-cate of the program (the executionof a Prolog program begins fromthe proof of the goal predicate). Itgets the protein pattern from the listof N atoms, and then infers the struc-ture of cell organelles (by the or-ganelle predicates: nucleus, mem-brane, etc) from the protein pattern,using the general plan (skeleton,frame) of organelle structure. mem-brane — an organelle predicate, de-scribing an abstract memrane as aset of relations (in the form of anetwork or a graph) between mem-brane components. memA — an ab-stract membrane component,decribed as two proteins: kinase andlipase, with the distance between


them less than 10 (this condition ischecked by the predicate dlt — dis-tance less than); data about memA iswritten into MemA. protein_pattern— scans NN, checks whether the cur-rent N belongs to the amino acidthat is the first amino acid in protein(predicate amino1st); if it does not,then protein_pattern tests the nextN. When it recognizes the protein,its gets data about the type, loca-tion, orientation (P), and adds thesedata to PP. This form of predicaterecord generates the recursion toscan NN and to form PP. protein —defines all types of proteins. kinase,lipase — define the linear structureof some abstract proteins. ala, gly —define the structure of internal aminoacids: alanine, glycin. bondN,bondC, bondCO — check the type ofnext covalently bonded atom in theatomic chain composing the aminoacid/protein skeleton, using data

about the atomic environment of thecurrent atom (gotten using the cur-sor in P).

The functioning of the programis described in the main body of thearticle.

Acknowledgement

I am very grateful to R. MichaelPerry, Ph.D. for his help in editing.

References

1. Merkle R.C. “The Molecular Repair ofthe Brain”, Cryonics, Oct. (1989).

2. Merkle R.C. “The Molecular Repair ofthe Brain”, Cryonics, 1st Quarter and 2ndQuarter (1994).

Diagram 1: Cell Repair Program—————————------------------------------------------------------————-cell :- protein_pattern(NN,PP), nucleus(PP), ..., membrane(PP).

membrane(PP) :- memA(PP,MemA), ... .

memA(PP,MemA) :- dlt(kinase,lipase,10,PP,MemA).

protein_pattern([],[]).

protein_pattern([N|NN],[P|PP]) :- amino1st(N), protein(P), protein_pattern(NN,PP).

protein(P) :- kinase(P)....protein(P) :- lipase(P).

kinase(P) :- ..., ala(P), gly(P), ... ....lipase(P) :- ..., gly(P), ala(P), ... .

ala(P) :- bondN(P), bondC(P), (bondC(P); bondCO(P))....gly(P) :- bondN(P), bondC(P), bondCO(P).

3. Ettinger R.C.W. “The Pros-pect of Immortality” (1964).

4. Drexler K.E. “Engines ofCreation” (1986).

5. Drexler K.E. “Introductionto Nanotechnology”, in “Pros-pects in Nanotechnology”(1995).

6. Soloviov M.V. “SCRAMReanimation”, Cryonics, 1stQuarter (1996).

7. Pool R. “The Children ofthe STM”, Science, 9 Feb.(1990).

8. Rovensky Y.A. “ScanningElectronic Microscopy of Nor-mal and Tumor Cells” (1979).[In Russian]

9. Stevens C. “Neuron”, in“Brain” (1979).

10. Shepherd G.M. “Neurobiology” (1983).

11. Slyusarev A.A. “Biology and GeneralGenetics” (1978). [In Russian]

12. Volkenstein M.V. “Biophysics” (1981).[In Russian]

13. Sengbusch P. “Molecular and Cell Bi-ology”, vol. 1 (1982). [In Russian]

14. Vishnyakov V.A. e.a. “Hardware andSoftware for the Processors of Logic Infer-ence” (1991). [In Russian]

15. Stix G. “Toward ‘Point One’“, Scien-tific American, Feb. (1995).

16. Peterson I. “Microtools for ScalingNanomountains”, Science News, 1 Apr.(1995).


Although in theory it’s a goodidea to ask people who don’t

sign up for cryonics why they didn’tdo it, in practice the information isabout as likely to generate real psy-chological reasons as asking people“why” they didn’t take their bloodpressure pills, wear their seat-belts,or keep their dental or doctor ap-pointments. What are they going totell you? The real “reasons” whypeople deal (or fail to deal) ratio-nally with pain and risk, and withlife-and-death decisions, are gener-ally too deep to get at, through aquestionnaire. Good luck.

After more than a decade withthe cryonics movement (and morethan a decade of being signed upmyself) I’ve come to some of myown subjective conclusions aboutwhy people do or don’t sign up.

You can take them for what they areworth. Some of this I’ve said beforeon the net long ago, but I’ll charita-bly repeat it for those who’ve missedit. You’re all entitled to my opin-ions, after all.

The first thing I think it’s im-portant to realize is that most peopledon’t fail to sign up for cryonic sus-pension because they think it won’twork, or can’t work. On the con-trary, the reason most people don’tsign up is because they are afraid itwill work, and leave them after res-urrection stranded as loners or so-cial outcasts (the Frankenstein pen-alty). In order to get past that fear,people need to be anesthetized tothe social consequences of radicaltime travel, in some way.

Ways in which this happens dif-fer from person to person. It seems

to me that people who sign up forcryonic suspension broadly fall intotwo categories, according to howthey deal with the idea of irrevers-ible radical future time travel:

Type I: The technogeeks. I don’tmean to disparage this group toomuch, since I probably fit here mostclosely myself. Technogeek peopleare lone wolves, almost always men,who for one reason or another don’tfeel a great affinity or connectionwith their society anyway. Theiropinions are generally radical, andtheir IQ usually high (although theirEQ or emotional intelligence is of-ten low). Often they work in techni-cal fields. If they work in socialfields they have some other reasonfor already being disconnected oralienated from society (ie, gay men

Why Aren’t They Signing up?by Steven B. Harris, MD

The following text was taken from CryoNet message #8776, 13 Nov. 1997. It isreprinted here by permission of the author.


or women). The idea of radical timetravel to the far future simply doesnot terrify them. They generally re-port being avid SF readers, and re-port deciding to sign up instantly assoon as they heard that cryonics wasfinancially feasible.

Not being very sensitive,technogeek people usually have noidea why everyone does not sign upfor cryonics, and they usually endup thinking the reasons have to dowith some theoretical argument inphysics or nanotechnology, or somefailure of marketing. “Gee,” onehears these people say, “we shouldbe able to get thousands of newmembers if only we do the follow-ing simple thing: . . .” These peopleare suckers for others who claim tohave the simple answer. Trying toconvince them that the problem isfar more complicated usually goesnowhere, because they simply lackthe emotional equipment to under-stand why most people don’t wantto travel into the future without theirpostcranial corpori, or their socialmilieus.

Type I cryonicists and theirfamilies (who are Type II) includemost of the early cryonicists in themovement, up to the beginning ofthe “logarthmic phase” or exponen-tial growth in the cryonics move-ment, from 1986-1993, or so.

Type II: We’ve looked at TypeI cryonicists. Type II cryonicists aresimply everybody else who signsup. For the average non-technogeek

person, the idea of traveling into thefuture where society and human re-lationships are radically different, isterrifying. As is the physical idea ofhaving the cryonics operation doneon one’s body (for neurosuspension,add more apprehension). In order toget past these basic fears, mostpeople (the type II people) requiretwo assurances before they sign up:1) That a large fraction of their so-cial relationships survive with them.This requires close contact and anumber of personal relationshipswith other cryonicists, over a longperiod of time. 2) That the cryonicsoperation be done on them by peoplethey know, and who they have es-tablished a kind of doctor-patientrelationship with. Radical medicaltechnology is scary, and you don’twant it done on you by strangers orscrew-ups. Preferably, you’d like toknow the medical high priests in-volved, and have confidence in theirtechnical skills.

Since one or both of these fac-tors must be present (in some mea-sure or another), growth of cryonicsby Type II membership requiresregular cryonics meetings and so-cial activities, as well as a highlycompetent suspension team whichhas some charisma, and is highlyvisible in cryonics activities. If bothof these factors are present, the ideaof cryonics spreads through localand close social contact exponen-tially like a disease (technically:meme), though not a very infectiousdisease (ie, more like HIV than the

flu virus). Interrupt this process,however, and exponential growthdisappears, to be replaced by the lin-ear background noise of continuingType I/technogeek signups, whichare always with us. This happenedin 1993, when the ejection of MikeDarwin and other key personnel fromAlcor, and the movement of Alcorphysically to Arizona, caused a splitin the cryonics membership whichcaused both factions to fall belowthe critical mass of technical skillsand social relationships necessary tosustain log growth.

What do I see in the future ofcryonics? It seems inevitable thateventually, in some place, after aslow accumulation of Type I signupsand their families, the critical massof relationships and skills will allowfor log growth of cryonics to con-tinue locally once again. I do notknow when this will happen. Muchdepends on negotiations now takingplace between factions of cryonicists.It may happen in 2 years or 20, but itwill happen.

How important is continuing re-search in this scheme? Fairly impor-tant, but only in the context above.If suspended animation is achieved,don’t look for a huge signup to fol-low; for reasons explained above,we probably won’t see much extragrowth at all. But that doesn’t meanwe don’t need to do the research.

Steven B. Harris, MD is a board-certified internist and gerontologist, as well as a long-timecryonicist and accomplished writer. Dr. Harris has advised on numerous cases of humanbiopreservation and has participated in canine deep hypothermia experiments performed by21st Century Medicine, Inc.


Your future survival may dependas much on broad support for

cryonics as on cryotechnology. Thatsupport will yield more members,improving Alcor’s financial secu-rity and, in turn, the probability ofyour reanimation. It will also pavethe way for support of cryonics-friendly initiatives such as right-to-die and funding for research oncryosuspension and reanimation.

Unfortunately, public relationsis extraordinarily labor-intensive. Itcannot be left to a few people. Weall must consider doing our bit. Nexttime you think about watching asitcom or cleaning out the basement,ask yourself if a little cryonics PRmight be a better use of your time.

But you say, “I’m the oppositeof a PR-type.” Most cryonicists are.Yet there is much that each of uscan do:

1. GET SKILLED AT OVER-COMING KEY OBJECTIONSTO CRYONICS.

Whether you’re being inter-viewed in the media, or simply talk-ing with friends or relatives, youwill be affecting people’s opinionsof cryonics — for better or for worse.Key will be how you address theinevitable objections: it won’t work,it’s selfish, it ignores the soul, whyisn’t everyone doing it, it’s environ-mentally problematic, the moneycould be better spent, etc. Try torespond (gently but confidently) withsomething like, “I understand whyyou would feel that way. I used tothink that too, but. . .” and then giveyour explanation. That sort of un-derstanding approach will often helpto gain converts or at least turn an-tagonists into neutrals.

I am a radio talk show host and

frequent guest on KGO’s RonnOwens Show (talking about careerand education coaching, not cryon-ics) so I have a lot of experienceresponding to objections. Here ishow I would answer the most com-mon objections to cryonics:

“It won’ work.”

Currently, you’re absolutelyright. But think of the amazingprogress we have made in medicalscience. 100 years ago, it would beunthinkable that we could clone asheep, yet today we can. Currently,we can’t repair aged or cancerouscells, but perhaps in 100-200 yearswe can. We know that if, when wedie, we don’t get frozen, we will rotand have no chance of coming backto live ever. If, however, we do getfrozen, there is at least some chanceof our being revived. And, at mini-

Four public relations activities every cryonicist can do tosave his life and help the cryonics movement.

by Marty Nemko


mum, when I am dying, I will havesome peace of mind knowing that atleast there is a chance I will comeback. That reduces my fear of dy-ing.

“It’s a scam by the cryonics compa-nies.”

Fact is, they are operating at aloss. Most of the employees are vol-unteers, and the salaried people makeunder $20,000 a year. We do it be-cause we believe in it.

“It’s selfish.”

To spend some money to get achance to return to life in a futurecentury seems far less profligate thanthe huge sums of money that peoplespend to stay alive in a coma orwhen they are pain-wracked withcancer, and certainly the huge sumspeople spend to buy palatial homes.

“It’s environmentally problematic.”

The degree of overpopulationthat would accrue is tiny comparedwith the impact of non-use of birthcontrol in third-world countries. Theaverage number of children parentedper cryonicist is less than 1. Thatdoes a far greater environmentalgood than someone with 3 or morechildren who doesn’t get frozen uponhis death.

“It’s unnatural. It’s ungodly.”

No one says it’s ungodly whenan emergency medical technicianperforms CPR to save someonewhose heart has stopped, even

though that essentially brings theperson back from the dead. Cryon-ics is the same thing. We freeze aperson until such time as we canresuscitate him.

“It ignores the soul.”

We freeze the body, not the soul.If you believe in a soul, you don’tbelieve it can be frozen like a pieceof meat, do you?

2. CALL NEWSPAPERS, RADIOAND TV STATIONS.

I used to be scared to do that,but I’ve found that it’s much easierthan I thought.

When the switchboard operatoranswers, say, “I have a science storyidea. Who should I pitch it to?”Then, when you get to speak withthe reporter, propose a feature oncryonics in which you and/or cryon-ics cognoscenti are interviewed. Themedia are particularly interested intrend pieces, so a good way to pitchit is, “There has been a real increasein the number of people who areelecting to be frozen upon theirdeaths in the hopes of being reani-mated when medical science ad-vances enough to rejuvenate them.And these aren’t crackpots. They’reprimarily computer programmers,scientists, and the like. I’m one ofthem. Would you like to do a storyon the increased interest in cryon-ics?” Or if you’re shy, simply offerto refer the person to some cryonistswho are less shy. Even if you dowant to be interviewed, editors usu-ally need to interview multiple

Marty Nemko is an Oakland career counselor and hosts a radio show, “Work withMarty Nemko” on KALW-FM 91.7 San Francisco, 11 a.m-noon.

people for a story. You might con-sider such experienced intervieweesas Steve Bridge, Ralph Merkle,Charles Platt, Brian Wowk, JimYount, or even myself, MartyNemko. [Alcor can supply seriouscallers with contact information forthese individuals. — ed.]

3. WRITE ARTICLES FOR LO-CAL MEDIA SUCH AS, “WHYYOU SHOULD BE FROZEN.”

You may be surprised to knowthat it is quite easy to get publishedin newspapers — perhaps not in theflagship newspaper of your city, butcertainly in community publications.

4. DO INTERNET POSTINGSABOUT CRYONICS ON NON-CRYONICS SITES.

This is an easy way to exposeour ideas to many thousands ofpeople. The possibilities are endless:health-related listservs, science-re-lated chat rooms, etc.

If you need additional help inyour public relations efforts, Alcoris glad to help any way it can. Call1-800-367-2228, or [email protected]. Though yourprojects may not immediately cre-ate an avalanche of publicity, reach-ing even one or two potentialcryonicists can have an enormousimpact on the future of cryonics.


Why three names: Kars is my maiden name; I wish to keep my family remembered.

Date joined Alcor: 1989

Place of birth: Kansas City, Missouri

City and state of current residence: Las Vegas, Nevada

Date of birth: 12/12/18

Job(s) / volunteer work: Formerly hospital volunteer; now nutrition and self-help for friends and family.

Marital status: Married

Children: None

Educational background: KC Junior College, two years.

Height: 5’ 1”; I don’t have far to fall!

Best feature: Like to help people.

Worst feature: Can’t tolerate intolerance.

Favorite author: Dr. Andrew Whil on alternative medicine.

Favorite books: Non-fiction health books.

Book you are currently reading: A Cure for Cancer; I usually read magazines.

Favorite non-cryonics magazine: Let’s Live and Life Extension health magazines.

Favorite movie: “The Way We Were”; also, Paul Newman movies.

Favorite TV show: “Frasier!” Also, “Law and Order.”

Favorite music: Classical, Also, Gershwin

Favorite artist: Renoir; he does fat women so well.

Katie Kars Friedman

For the new year, Cryonics Magazine would like to present a new column: Alcor Member Profiles.Each quarter, one Alcor member will be selected for a brief personal interview. We hope to

introduce the Alcor membership and the Cryonics Magazine reading community to a wider view ofitself, by communicating membership background, beliefs, and ideas. Alcor has hundreds of fascinat-ing members who may not now be widely known in the cryonics community. We hope that theProfile column will provide a relatively easy, informal means to give some of these people the broaderattention they deserve.

Profile Editor: Russell Cheney


Greatest adventure: Europe just after WW II. I needed to get from Paris to England to collect money owed me,to return to the US. At the English Channel my boat left before my train arrived. I spent the night in a hotelwith a bombed-out roof. The next evening in Liverpool it took three porters to carry all my luggage, and Ihad no money to pay them, and I couldn’t understand a word with their English accent. I stayed the nightin a good Samaritan’s wife’s house, and gave them some canned goods as a thanks! I finally was paid anddid get back to the US.

Religion: Cryonics.

Most-prized possession: My privacy.

Most-prized possession you’ve arranged to have upon reanimation: None, because there’s nothing I ever want to seea g a i n .

Personal philosophy: I want to feel I’m in charge of my own destiny.

Short-term goal: Help others; keep up with health research for others and for myself, including diabetes formy sister, and my brother, who is on oxygen, and smart pills and other new research for the brain.

Long-term goal: At 78, can you have a long-term goal? If so, it’s my research.

Immediate goal upon reanimation: I’d like to have my body and intelligence redesigned.

Longer-term goal(s) after reanimation: Although it’s hard to plan without knowing details, something in thehealth field, perhaps become a nutritionist or doctor.

Achievement for which you are most proud: That I’m at this age and still have a useful energetic attitude. Plussuccess stories with people I’ve helped.

Favorite subject in school: English; I wrote a book of poetry.

Least-liked subject: Math.

Pet(s): Previously for 13 years, my Himalayan cat.

Greatest fear: A snafu in my suspension.

Happiest memory: Going to Europe.

Secret ambition / fantasy: To get suspended properly.

First choice to share your dewar: Whoever wants to go; Jerry Searcy, Linda and Fred Chamberlain.

Personal strengths: Enthusiasm.

Personal weaknesses: Energy.

First became interested in life extension: Before 1989 read about it, or saw it on TV.

Reason: To have a chance in the future; I don’t believe in reincarnation or an afterlife.

Who was most instrumental in your sign-up: Carlos Mondragon.

Most effective thing you do to promote your own longevity (other than being an Alcor member): Very strict diet. Feed mymind and body. Lots of supplements. Green drinks, organic food. Silver colloidal spray. Rarely meats. Swimthree times a week. Used to play tennis, but had to stop that after the neck injury; walk every day.

Least: Inhale car exhaust.

Cryonics idol(s) and why: Saul Kent. An innovator and he gets things done.

Why are you a cryonicist: I’m in cryonics because it gives me a comfort zone. Because this way, I don’t have tothink about death in the same way I did before.

What advice would you have for other cryonicists: Most are smarter than I am; what advice could I give? Beaware of life style; the longer you’re around, the better the chances that research will catch up to you.


On Rereading The Immortalist

by Thomas Donaldson, Ph.D.

Alan Harrington died not longago, to the accompaniment of

encomia by various people. Coinci-dentally, a book-search company fi-nally turned up a copy of TheImmortalist for me to buy (I hadread it long ago, but did not own acopy). It was even a first edition,dated 1969. I bought that copy andread it once more, to see howHarrington looked to me after allthis time.

The Immortalist starts with aringing denunciation: “Death is animposition of the human race, andno longer acceptable.” Despite thisbold stance, Harrington never joinedany cryonics society. His reasons,described in one chapter of the book,amount to strong skepticism aboutwhether or not cryonics would work.Even so, this book is not all thatstrong on the science surroundingcryonics and life extension.Harrington gives this subject onlyone chapter, which is filled with re-cent (1967) news about transplants,and the suggestion by Dr. RobertWhite (who had just finished trans-planting a dog’s head) that headtransplants might someday becomecommon. All that aside, Harringtondid acknowledge very clearly thatthe road to defeating death wentthrough medical science.

Yet science isn’t the only issuehere. Most of The Immortalist dealswith how so many people hide fromthemselves their desire for immor-tality, how that desire keeps show-ing itself despite their efforts, andfinally, speculations about the expe-rience of such immortality (whichhe defines as agelessness, not free-dom from destruction in other ways).Harrington has some perceptivepoints on those issues. He arguesthat most human beings’ belief inthe inevitability of death has twistedthem into pathological states. Heuses most of his book to describehow this happens, in detail.

In one set of chapters, he ana-lyzes both the notion of evil and thenotion of a devil (Satan) as signs ofour wish for immortality. To com-mit evil acts often leads to muchfame, and thus a kind of immortal-ity. Not only that, but all the mythsin Christian, Muslim, and evenGreek mythology say that evildoersmay be punished but also becomeimmortal. (How else could their pun-ishment last forever?) Religions mayalso designate some acts as sinful,even though they damage no one;such acts consist fundamentally of awish for the immortality that godsor God have denied to us. In onechapter, “Satan as Our Standard

Bearer,” Harrington makes this is-sue very clear: God created us todie, and thus God must be consid-ered our enemy. All the theologiansand philosophers who argue that“death is good” are indeed doingGod’s work.

Explicit desires for immortalityhave been denigrated by philoso-phers and authorities of many stripes.Such desires are labeled signs ofhubris (pride so great that the godswill strike it down), and show a lackof wisdom or a lack of understand-ing about God’s magnificent plan.Life and death are so closely linkedthat one cannot happen without theother. . . and so on, and so on.(Harrington gives us many quotesfrom such thinkers and their hang-ers-on.)

One line of his thinking, whichtakes up several chapters, discusseshow our striving for real immortal-ity has been diverted into a strivingagainst one another for notice of ourachievements. That notice, implic-itly, goes into newspapers and his-tory books, and so provides the oneform of immortality against whichmost Western philosophers and theo-logians do not argue. Harringtonfinds several different styles we usein accomplishing this goal. One isto become a Master of our Universe,


dominating everyone around us.Another is to withdraw into groups,hoping that the actions of our groupwill give all its members the desiredimmortality. However, suchstrivings taken to extremes may leadultimately to cruelty and evil. Whena dominator encounters resistance,he responds with more and morecruel retribution. When groups com-pete, they try to damage each otheras a means to establish their greaterlegitimacy. Another response con-sists simply of using alcohol, LSD,or other drugs to lose one’s sense ofself completely — to “die” whileremaining alive.

Not one of these strategies willultimately produce the immortalitywe all consciously or unconsciouslyseek. The dominator eventually findshimself facing death, to the joy ofthose he enslaved. Anyone who triesto bury his individuality in a groupmust still deal with the reality ofdeath as an individual. Drugs, tantricpractices, or any of the other waysto forget one’s self eventually fail.Put simply, all these ways of striv-ing for false immortality inflictpeople with types of mental illnessthat are not seen as such only be-cause they are almost universal.

Given the possibility of immortalitythrough advances in medicine (vis-ible and occasionally discussedaloud, even in 1969), Harringtonurges us to abandon these false im-mortalities and strive as best we canfor real immortality.

Finally, Harrington speculates onhow the foreknowledge of an in-definitely long and healthy life spanmight transform us. (His version ofimmortalism assumes that fatal ac-cidents will continue.) Much phi-losophy would simply disappear,since its proponents focused on rec-onciling us with death rather thanurging us to work against it. Anytheology claiming that God meantus to die would disappear. Much artand literature would disappear also,for similar reasons. If we no longerstrove against one another for vari-ous types of false immortality, cru-elty and evil would diminish. Eventhough Harrington cannot acceptcryonics, suspended animationcomes into his views, as a way inwhich we might live one life, sleepfor a hundred years, and then awakenfor another life. (When I read this, Iwondered why Harrington thoughtsuch sleeps were necessary. Per-haps he considered them analogous

to our nightly sleep.) Failure wouldbecome impossible if we had no limitin time — we could always try again.Nor would we have to spend ourlives on a career we chose in youth,when we possessed comparativelylittle knowledge of the world.

Are Harrington’s ideas scientifi-cally accurate? Does a belief in theinevitability of death cause the pa-thologies he detailed? We may haveto attain immortality ourselves be-fore we know the answers. Never-theless, Harrington’s openness inanalyzing his own feelings aboutdeath still deserves respect, and maysomeday be seen as truly pioneeringwork. But even though Harringtonoften states his desire for immortal-ity and constantly explains why ev-eryone should have the right to livewithout the axe of death hangingover their heads, he himself fails tograsp his only available option forreaching this goal: cryonics. Wemight note this as an example ofwhat a sense of death’s inevitabilitymay have done to so many.

culture shock or even turn out to beold farts stuck in the past?

Last but not least (in fact, mostimportant) is yet another psychol-ogy-related matter: cyberphobiaand the fear of life, and how hu-manity can be gradually conditionedto overcome these. Cyberphobiaserves as the greatest threat to our

dreams and goals. Is it possible thata future society might decide to thawus out without reviving us? The onlyway to prevent this is to ensure thatthere are future generations topropogate our ideas (not just hopeone day they miraculously becomemainstream.)

I guess these are just a few mat-ters that I personally like to con-template and that perhaps allcryonicists at one point will. I hopeif discussion has not begun, more

psychology-related issues (includingthat of depression, suicide, and otheremotionally/life span related man-ners) will be discussed.

Sincerely,

EDO (Edward Landsberg)[email protected]

Letters to the EditorCont. from page 3


Death at the Edge of Forever:The Story of a Child

by R. Michael Perry, Ph.D.

Longtime immortalists may remember The Cryonicist, a little

trifold newsletter published byPatrick Dewey between November1977 and October 1980 (just 15 is-sues, with #9 and #10 combined intoone). Most issues were on fairly lightsubjects, but #11, October 1979, wasdevoted entirely to one grim articleby Art Quaife entitled, “Cryonic In-terment Patients Abandoned.” Thearticle opened by recounting effortson the part of certain cryonics pa-tients’ relatives to arrange a transferof their frozen loved ones to Art’sorganization, Trans Time. The pa-tients were stored at Robert Nelson’sfacility, an underground vault at theOakwood Memorial Park Cemeteryin Chatsworth, California. The rela-tives had reason to suspect all wasnot well here — and rightly so. Thearticle reported the sad news that allChatsworth patients had thawed.

Some of the Chatsworth patients’relatives sued Nelson and won largeawards for damages. Cryonics re-ceived a bad name from which itonly slowly recovered. Worst of all,nine human beings lost a chance fora life beyond the brief span that na-ture allotted them. The horror ofChatsworth cannot be undone, but itcan and does inspire us to avoidsuch tragedies in the future. We can

help to keep this goal in the mindsof ourselves and others by remem-bering the casualties of Chatsworth.

For this column, I want to focuson one of these casualties, a littlegirl stricken with a terminal illness,whose father made a heroic — iffutile — effort to save her throughcryonics.

In July 1971, Genevieve de laPoterie*, a French Canadian girl withan engaging smile and large browneyes, was nearing her eighth birth-day. Unfortunately, little Genevievehad been diagnosed with a Wilms’tumor and metastasized cancer. Withone of Genevieve’s kidneys removedand the other diseased, the Montrealhospital treating her had decidedthere was nothing more they coulddo but wait for the end.

Genevieve’s father, however,had seen a TV program on cryonics.At one point during the programthere appeared an emergency vanwith “Cryonics Society of Michi-gan” showing on the side. This ledMr. del la Poterie to Robert Ettingerin Detroit, and Ettinger in turn puthim in touch with Robert Nelson ofthe Santa Monica-based CryonicsSociety of California (CSC). Withthe little girl’s condition so precari-

ous, Nelson and a mortician quicklypacked perfusion gear and flew toMontreal. (Their gear, primitive byour standards, included standardmortuary equipment and bottles ofDMSO, which was used then as acryoprotectant.)

Somehow the child lingered on,and her father decided to seek treat-ment in Los Angeles. Sympatheticcryonicists there — among themFred and Linda Chamberlain, MarceJohnson, Holly Martin, and PaulPorcasi — helped coordinateGenevieve’s hospitalization. Themedical picture brightened consid-erably. . . for the moment. Doctorsconcluded that Genevieve might besaved through dialysis and eventu-ally, a kidney transplant. In earlyAugust, with dialysis established,Genevieve’s one remaining kidneywas removed, and the wait beganfor a suitable donor. In early Sep-tember the little girl visitedDisneyland, courtesy of Nelson, anda dinner was held afterward in herhonor, at which she “sparkled de-spite her difficulties.” Genevievethen returned to Montreal.

There she continued to improve,and even returned to school briefly.But her cancer was still present, and

* Pronounced, approximately, Zhanh-vyev du la Poh-TRAY.


by the following January her condi-tion was once again grave.Genevieve and her parents, Guy andPierrette, returned to Los Angeles.On January 25, 1972, Genevieve dela Poterie finally succumbed to herillness and was suspended by CSC.The Outlook (now The Immortalist)reported, “We mourn the present lossof this plucky child, but we sharewith her courageous parents the hopethat one day she will be with themagain, alive and whole.”

Genevieve’s freezing, at least,was a hopeful step in that direction.A cryonics patient must not merelybe frozen, however, but must alsobe kept frozen. Today we recognizethe need for pre-arranged fundingto cover the cost of continued, in-definite maintenance. This meansthat several tens of thousands of dol-lars must be set aside and invested,so that the ongoing income fromthese investments can pay for liquidnitrogen, storage space, and othernecessities. In 1972, few people un-derstood the need for this strategy;cryonics patients relatives were gen-erally expected to provide funds formaintenance on a year-by-year ba-sis.

Little Genevieve’s parents were

not wealthy. They prob-ably did not have tens ofthousands of dollars forfunding (though of courseno one required it of themat the time), and by all in-dications, they could noteven afford a cryogeniccapsule in which to storetheir daughter. Onlythrough luck did a capsulebecome available.

Steven Mandell hadbeen frozen in 1968 by theCryonics Society of NewYork. Four years later,Mandell’s mother, Pauline,was feeling the pinch of themaintenance costs at theNew York facility andlooking for a cheaper ac-commodation, which Nelson of-fered. Steven Mandell’s capsule wastransferred to CSC about the timeGenevieve was frozen. It was an old,horizontal model, manufactured byCryocare Equipment Corporation inPhoenix, and similar in basic designto the capsule used for the suspen-sion of James Bedford in 1967.Nelson happily accepted capsule andoccupant, but before depositing themin his Chatsworth crypt, he added

two other patients.“Adding patients”

was not easy. First thecapsule had to be emp-tied of all (or nearly all)its liquid nitrogen, risk-ing the patient inside.An expert welder thenhad to use a torch to cutoff one end of the cap-sule, then weld it backwith an airtight sealwhen the insertionswere complete. Thecapsule could then berefilled with liquid ni-

trogen. (Far safer procedures arenow used for patient transfers in-volving today’s more advanced con-tainers.) Besides Genevieve de laPoterie, Mildred Harris also joinedSteven Mandell in this capsule. (Mrs.Harris had been frozen in Septem-ber 1970 by CSC but maintained ondry ice since, bizarrely, in a spe-cially constructed box with an ob-servation window. This was alsostored at the Chatsworth crypt dur-ing its use.) The Mandell capsule,now holding three patients, was fi-nally consigned to Nelson’sChatsworth crypt where, in theory,it would then be periodically replen-ished with liquid nitrogen.

Sadly, this did not occur. Al-though exact details are wanting,evidence suggests that the capsulewas adequately maintained with liq-uid nitrogen for only about twoyears.

“Cryonic interment” — what youhad to look forward to if you werefrozen by CSC — was a far cryfrom today’s practice of cryonic stor-

Genevieve at Disneyland,September 1971.

[The Outlook, Jan 1973].

Ettinger with the Michigan van.[Immortality, Aug-Sep 1970.]


The three in one capsule (top to bottom): Steven Mandell, Mildred Harris, Genevieve de la Poterie.

[Credits: Mandell, Cryonics Reports Sep 1968; Harris, ImmortalityWinter 1971; de la Poterie, The Outlook Aug 1971.]

age. The crypt at Chatsworth was aa concrete-lined underground cham-ber, about 20 feet long, 10 feet wide,and 12 feet deep. The steel-paneled,flat roof projected only inches abovethe surrounding turf; a large hatchprovided entrance and also lightingto guide your steps down a verticalladder to the floor below. The hatchwas large enough in fact that a cap-sule could be lowered through it. Tofacilitate servicing with liquid ni-trogen, the vault was set close to apassing street, only inches separat-ing the nearest of the 10-foot sidesfrom the curb.

Primitive though it was, the cryptmight have been successful, had itreceived careful attendance. Unfor-tunately, under the ministrations ofRobert Nelson, this was not to be.

On occasion, Nelson would ex-aggerate his resources and capabili-ties. In a 1969 newletter, for in-stance, he makes glowing (if fuzzy)claims about the “world’s firstcryotorium,” just completed by CSC.Good evidence suggests suggests this“cryotorium” consisted of four fro-zen patients crammed into a singlecapsule, similar to the later situationwith Genevieve (though of coursethis was not reported). Dishonestytends to breed secrecy, and by allaccounts, Nelson was highly secre-tive.

Some of Nelson’s secrecy prob-ably involved that first four-patientcapsule. Cemetery records establishthat the capsule was placed in theChatsworth crypt on May 15, 1970.(Prior to this, it was maintained in amortuary, probably with some suc-

cess.) Nelson, in his 1983 court tes-timony, claimed he maintained thecapsule for a year and a half afterplacement in the vault, or until aboutNovember 1971, when, lackingfunds and finding relatives unwill-ing to pay, he stopped adding liquidnitrogen. The capsule, with its fourdecomposing bodies, was simplyabandoned where it was. For yearsthis was a very tightly guarded se-cret, as was any reliable informa-tion about things at the crypt.

Meanwhile Genevieve de laPoterie was frozen and sent to thesame grim resting place.

According to a 1990 interviewwith Nelson, the Mandell capsulecontaining Genevieve malfunctionedwhile Nelson was away on a five-day business trip. (He had dependedon a cemetery official to keep watchover it.) Like most cryogenic units,this capsule’s construction was simi-lar to the familiar, double-walledthermos, with the space between thewalls evacuated to minimize heatflow. In this case, the vacuum haddeveloped a leak; air had to bepumped back out, or the loss of in-sulation would cause nitrogen to boilaway rapidly.

On Nelson’s previous instruc-tions, cemetery officials moved thecapsule to a “maintenance area”where the vacuum pump could beapplied and monitored. After oneday of this, Nelson received a calltelling him that the pump had bro-ken down but had been fixed. Whenhe returned to Chatsworth four dayslater, he found that the pump hadnot been fixed. All of the capsule’s


liquid nitrogen had long since evapo-rated, and the patients had thawed.

“I fell to the ground and I cried,”Nelson said. “God, that little girl —That finished me right there. It feltlike the worst failure in the world.How do I tell this man? [Guy de laPoterie]”

At this point, Nelson said, heresigned the CSC presidency, whichhe had held since the organizationwas founded nearly 8 years before.Written records establish that thisresignation occurred October 11,1974, helping to date the otherevents.

Nelson claimed that he subse-quently did not terminate the sus-pensions of the three Mandell cap-sule patients, but instead had theircapsule refilled with liquid nitrogenand its vacuum pump repaired.Nelson then made a trip to Iowa toconfer with the sons of Mildred Har-ris. The Harrises decided to con-tinue their mother’s suspension, de-spite what had happened. Nelsoncontinued on to Canada and met with

Location of crypt in theOakwood Memorial Park

cemetery.

Guy de la Poterie, who apparentlywas reassured that his daughter’ssuspension had not permanentlyended.

The next few years are more ofa mystery. Nelson, despite his resig-nation as president of CSC, contin-ued to operate the Chatsworth facil-ity. (Its actual affairs were handledby CSC’s sister organization,Cryonic Interment, Inc., and thenby another company, General Flu-idics.) Nelson claimed, however, thathis cryonics patients’ relatives ei-ther could not or would not makecontinuing payments for liquid ni-trogen. Because of this — and be-cause of another vacuum pump fail-ure — he finally had to “terminate”the three suspensions.

Nelson’s claim of non-paymentwas later disputed. Terry and Den-nis, the two sons of Mildred Harris,insisted that Nelson had promisedthe perpetual care of their mother,in exchange for their contributionstotalling over $20,000. Nelson him-self admitted, in court testimony, thathe hadn’t informed them about ter-minating their mother’s suspension.The court sided with the Harrises,who were awarded the lion’s shareof over $900,000 in damages (ofwhich $400,000 was actually col-lected, none of it from Nelson).

By May 1979, all of theChatsworth suspensions (nine alto-gether) had terminated. LittleGenevieve de la Poterie’s body hadbeen disinterred from the capsuleand buried. Guy de la Poterie didnot join the suit against Nelson, ap-parently accepting that the loss ofGenevieve was not due to any mal-feasance.

The loss of people who mighthave been saved is a bitter one. Onceagain though, we have to learn whatwe can from these failures. We must

always be on our guard for peoplewho offer cryonics services butwhose operation, in one way or an-other, for one reason or another, doesnot live up to expectations. Far big-ger disasters than Chatsworth arepossible. As cryonics grows morepopular, the danger only increases.

SOURCES

The Cryonicist, Oct. 1979.

The Outlook, Aug 1971, Sep 1971, Feb1972, Jul 1974, Nov 1974.

Cryonics Review, Mar/Apr 1969, Feb/Mar/Apr 1972.

Interview with Robert Nelson, VenturistMonthly News, May 1990, Aug 1990, Apr1991.

Interview with Joseph Klockgether,Venturist Monthly News, Feb 1996, Mar1996, Apr 1996.

For The Record, Cryonics, Mar 1992, 4.

Letters to Editor, Cryonics, Apr 1992, 2.

Court documents: Halpert v. Nelson,C161229 Judgment on verdict in opencourt; Appellant Robert F. Nelson’s settledstatement on appeal; Respondent’s settledstatement on appeal.

Cemetery records from Oakwood Memo-rial Park (available from the writer).

Newspaper articles by David Walker, Val-ley News, Jun 10, 13 and 24, 1979.

Hugh Hixon, personal communication,Nov. 30, 1997.


Growing Things

by Stephen J. Van Sickle

P ress reports are notoriouslyunrealiable. I should know: my

father has been in the news businessfor thirty years. Nevertheless, I amgoing to lead off with a couple ofitems that I haven’t yet been able toconfirm in academic publications,simply because they are so intrigu-ing. If anyone can find more, pleaselet me know. Remember, any andall contributions welcome. Just emailme at [email protected].

Headless Frog Clone?

On Oct 19, 1997 scientists atBath University in the United King-dom revealed to the Sunday Timesthat they had successfully createdheadless frog embryos. By geneti-cally modifying an embryo to sup-press the development of its head,the scientists in effect created an“organ sack” producing tissues thatmay be useful for organ transplants.Though the application to revival ofneurosuspension patients is obvious,the difficulties in growing an em-bryo sans central nervous system areenormous, since the brain regulatesmuch of the body’s function. If con-firmed, this is definitely an interest-ing first step.

http://www.wired.com/news/news/technology/story/7873.html

Artificial Womb

Of course, the second step isgrowing the embryo. Another pressreport is of an advance at JuntendoUniversity by Professor YoshinoriKuwabara, published in the Journalof the Japan Medical Association.His team has succeeded in incubat-ing goat fetuses in an artificial wombfor the final three weeks of theirdevelopment. “We’re aiming even-tually to use the technology for hu-man fetuses but it will take maybe10 years.” The primary goal is usewith premature infants rather thantotally artificial growth. I will likelyconfirm this, since Dr. Kuwabarahas been working towards this forsome time. See Unno N, et al. “De-velopment of an artificial placenta:survival of isolated goat fetuses forthree weeks with umbilical arterio-venous extracorporeal membraneoxygenation.” Artif Organs. 1993Dec 1; 17(12): 996-1003.

Successful Gene Therapy

Dr. Jeffrey Isner of St.Elizabeth’s Medical Center in Bos-ton announced at the annual meet-ing of the American Heart Associa-tion the use of gene therapy to growblood vessels in clinical trials. The

treatment was tested on 20 leg ath-erosclerosis patients who were fac-ing amputation. The therapy, calledtherapeutic angiogenesis, involvesinjecting a gene for the productionof VEGF, or vascular endothelialgrowth factor, directly into the legmuscles “where it instructs existingblood vessel cells to regenerate newblood vessels.” Improvements inblood flow were demonstrated in 16of the 20 patients. There is hope thetherapy will be useful for coronaryartheriosclerosis and stroke.

http://www.healthreport.com/Digest/IMAGES/gene.htm

New Nanotechnology Center

The University of Toronto, witha private contribution of $5 millionfrom the Toronto research firmEnergenius, will open a new researchfacility devoted to “making quan-tum-level microelectronics devicesby moving single atoms with aprobe.” This is the first facility ofits kind in North America. Science,Vol. 277, 19 September, 1997.

DNA Sensor UsesGold Nanoparticles

Researchers at NorthwesternUniversity in Evanston, Illinois have


made a DNA sensor from a web ofDNA and gold particles. The DNAstrands bind to matching sequences,while the electronic properties of thegold change color. This detectionsystem could result in easy, cheapscreening for infectious disease andbiological warfare agents. Evenmore importantly, the team feels thisis a proof of principle for a newmethod of using DNA to self-as-semble nanoparticles into complexdevices. See Science, Vol. 277, Au-gust 1997, page 1036 and page 1078.

Stupid LiquidNitrogen Tricks

And we thought it was just forkeeping things cold. Carlos A.Ordonez and his team at the Univer-sity of North Texas in Denton aretrying to develop a liquid nitrogen-powered vehicle. Their prototype,called the CoolN2Car, can travel 15miles at 20 miles per hour on 48gallons of liquid nitrogen. This is

hardly practical, but the group feelsthat recent improvements in the ef-ficiency of liquid nitrogen produc-tion, combined with an improvedmotor, will make this fuel economi-cally competitive with gasoline.Since liquid nitrogen is extractedfrom air and pollutants are removedin the process, the cars can actuallyimprove air quality. And unlike elec-tric cars, air conditioning is not aproblem. Science News, Vol. 152,August 23, 1997, page 119.

Supernormal Eyesight?

I never did buy those x-rayglasses from the back of my comicbooks, but something even bettermay be coming soon. David R. Wil-liams of the University of Rochesterhas been applying the technology ofadaptive optics to the human eye.Adaptive optics, developed for laserweapons and used extensively in as-tronomical observations, involvesthe use of “rubber” mirrors and

Stuff: The Materials the World is Made ofby Ivan Amato, Basic Books 1997

Reviewed by Thomas Donaldson, PhD

Ivan Amato writes popularizationsof various sciences. This book,

with such a blunt title (one revieweradmires Amato just for getting his

publisher to use the word Stuff )discusses materials science. Whydoes materials science relate to cry-onics? Because it is one of the many

streams of work in nanotechnology*;anyone damaged by cryonic suspen-sion (such as you) will need someform of nanotechnological repair.

lenses that change shape to correctfor distortions from the atmosphere.Dr. Williams has used this techniqueto correct for distortions in the eyeto produce the most detailed imagesof the retina ever, with individualcells clearly visible. Interestingly,this also seems to work in reverse,giving the retina an undistorted viewof the world. In tests, people withnormal eyesight have had up to asixfold improvement in sensitivityto contrast and the ability to see finelines invisible to the naked eye.“Subjectively, when you lookthrough the device, the world lookssharper,” says Dr. Williams. “Mydream is to some day sculpt a con-tact lens into just the right shape.”These techniques may also radicallyimprove current surgical proceduresused to correct vision. See ScienceNews, Vol. 152, November 15,1997, page 313.

* That is, “nanotechnology” taken literally, as technology capable of dealing with matter on nanoscales, not“Nanotechnology” (capital “N”) with the specialized Drexlerian meaning some have attached to it.


steel just as we now grow semicon-ductors (or by other better means!),allowing us to achieve metal withthe careful structuring we see in bio-logical materials.

“Smart” materials: Some scien-tists currently envision materialswhich have some ability to heal dam-age or inform users that they havebeen damaged, similar to what wesee in our bones and skin. We areonly on the edge of this dream: boneand skin form systems, not just or-dered collections of crystals or poly-mers. Those systems endow livingtissues with an ability to heal them-selves and report injury (and otherevents) far better than any currentlyimagined “smart” material.

Amato has not come close toexhausting the potential of these sub-jects. His book manages to evoke asense of wonder about what has beenand will be achieved in materialsscience. If you want to read aboutone of the other avenues ofnanotechnology, Stuff should inter-est you. It is knowledge of this kind,ideas for making ever more com-plex materials (such as in nano-de-vices), that will give us tools to re-vive those damaged by cryonic sus-pension.

Amato’s book is a bit uneven,mainly because he begins with asummary of our use of materialsfrom Paleolithic times onward.Amato is not a historian; for earlyperiods, he uses secondary sourcesand so probably fumbles the details.But as he nears the modern era hegets better and better. At one time,not so long ago, we had metallur-gists and metallurgy societies, poly-mer chemists and societies for plas-tics, ceramicists working with ce-ramics, and various other groupsworking on different materials. Onlyin the 1950’s did anyone realize theneed for a separate discipline, “ma-terials science,” which would bringtogether the chemists, physicists,biochemists, and others workingwith all these different kinds of stuff.

Amato describes what materialsresearch has done in many fields,with much more detail than possiblein this review. Materials scientistslearned how to control the siliconfrom which the chips in our com-puter are made. They learned howto make metal alloys and other sub-stances capable of withstandinghigher and higher temperatures inthe engines of rockets and aircraft.Materials scientists’ research led tocarbon fibers (now gradually becom-ing part of our everyday lives insuch things as tennis rackets) andglass fibers (slowly replacing elec-trical wires for long-distance com-munication). Materials scientists ap-pear all over, from medicine (gluesto replace sutures, artificial boneswhich our bodies will not reject) toattempts at taming nuclear fusion(materials resistant to neutrons andhigh temperatures). Even practicalhigh temperature superconductorscame from materials science re-search.

We have only seen the begin-

ning of such research, Amato ex-plains, and he goes on to mentiondirections in the future of materialscience. Here at last we seenanotechnology, such as thedendrimers of Donald Tomalia orthe connecting molecules of SamuelStupp. Both substances were in-vented not for themselves but asmeans to construct materials on amolecular scale. (Amato devotes onesection of his book to the use of theScanning-Tunneling Microscopes tomodify surfaces and place atoms.)

Amato includes detailed inter-views with materials scientists in-volved in three new developments:synthetic diamonds, mimicking bio-logical materials, and “smart” mate-rials.

Synthetic diamonds: Work goeson now to find out how to lay downdiamond surfaces on other objectsand make diamond semiconductors(a significant improvement on sili-con semiconductors). As an inter-esting sidelight, William G. Eversole(in 1952) invented the basic processto do this, forming diamond fromcarbon vapors rather than creating itby very high pressure. Since then,materials scientists have addressedthemselves to the problem of increas-ing the output of diamond createdby this method.

Mimicking biological materials: Researchers are working to achievethe same kinds of chemical synthe-sis accomplished by living things.For example, sea shells consist ofcarefully structured calcium carbon-ate organized in different ways atdifferent locations; duplicating thiseffect with other materials — as withan alloy changing its crystalline andelemental composition at designedlocations — would give us betterversions of familiar materials. Oneday we may even learn how to grow

MOVING?

Let us know about it!Call 1-800-367-2228

and ask for Joe Hovey.

Don’t miss even one issueof Cryonics!


Poster art by Tim Hubley

Alcor’s Third AnnualCryonics Conference

April 3 - April 5, 1998The Holiday Inn Airport Select

Near Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport


Early Bird “Thank You For Getting Us Started” Special Rate...received by December 1, 1997...$97

Regular Rate...received by March 3, 1998...$149

Late Rate...received by April 2, 1998...$179

Door Rate......$195

Individual Speaker/Panel...$25 Saturday Awards Luncheon...$20 Saturday Banquet...$36Ala Carte:

Name

Street Address

Phones, E-mail

City State/Prov. Postal Code Country

___ Registration(s) at ___$97 Early Bird ___$149 Regular ___$179 Late ___$195 Door

___$25 per Speaker/Panel ______________ ___$20 Luncheon ___$36 Banquet TOTAL______

REGISTRATION

Mail registration and payment to:1998 Alcor Conference, 7895 E. Acoma Dr., Ste. 110, Scottsdale, AZ 85260

Please make check payable to Alcor Foundation. Your check is your receiptPlease pick up your tickets at the conference. Thank You!

Alcor Third Annual Cryonics Conference

Featuring...From Alcor: Gregory Benford (tbc), Fred & Linda Chamberlain, Bart Kosko (tbc), Ralph

Merkle, Marvin Minsky (tbc), Michael CloudFrom The Venturists: Dave Pizer; From BioTime: Dr. Paul Segall, Hal Sternberg

From Cryonics Institute: Robert Ettinger

April 3 - April 5, 1998 Scottsdale/Phoenix, Arizona

For: Anyone interested in cryonics technology and communityInformation: (602) 922-9013 (800) 367-2228 (970) 484-8184

When: April 3 - April 5, 1998. Friday evening, Saturday, Sunday.

Where: The Holiday Inn Airport Select, near Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport. 4300 E. Washington,Phoenix, AZ 85034. (602) 273-7778

Lodging: $99/night/single or double room. Fifty rooms are being held through March 4, 1998.For additional information, contact the Chamber of Commerce in Scottsdale at(602) 945-8481 or in Phoenix at (602) 254-5521.

Cost: Full package includes all speakers and materials, Saturday awards luncheon and Saturdayfund-raising banquet.


Watch for future program developments as Alcor’s Third Annual Cryonics Conference approaches.

Sunday, April 5, 1998

8:45-9:30 am Bus to Alcor Facility9:30-11:15 am Alcor Tour and Sign-up Party11:15-11:45 am Bus returns to Conference Site11:45 am-1:15 pm lunch break1:15-2:15 pm Paul Segall and Hal Sternberg2:15-2:45 pm break2:45-3:15 pm Dave Pizer “A Retirement Community and Safe Storage”3:15-3:30 pm break3:30-4:30 pm Robert Ettinger4:30-5:00 pm wrap-up

Friday, April 3, 1998

7:00-8:00 pm registration, reception8:00-10:00 pm welcome: Merkle Mode Desert Contest

Gregory Benford (tbc) “Cryonics in Science Fiction”

P R O G R A M

Saturday, April 4, 1998

9:00-9:30 am Introduction9:30-10:30 am Fred & Linda Chamberlain “Alcor Research Update”10:30-11:00 am break11:00-12:00 Ralph Merkle “Nanotechnology Update

and Molecular Repair of the Brain”12:00-12:15 break12:15-1:30 pm awards luncheon1:30-2:30 pm Marvin Minsky (tbc)2:30-3:00 pm break3:00-4:00 pm panel “What’s in It for Me?”4:00-4:30 pm break4:30-5:30 Michael Cloud “How to Make the Idea of Cryonics Infectious”5:30-700 pm break7:00-7:30 pm reception with no host bar7:30-11:00 pm banquet and fund raiser

Bart Kosko (tbc)


Alcor Headquarters Training Session

Scheduled for Alcor CryoTransport Technicians

With the cost of airfare, have you worriedyou couldn’t afford to attend both

Alcor’s Third Cryonics Conference andAn ACT training class?

Join us in Scottsdale in April. Attend the training class on May 31 through April 2,

and then stay for the Conference onApril 3-5. Save Time! Save Money!

Have you wanted to become an ACT,but don’t live near a group

that can sponsor a local class?

Have you been unable to attend otherscheduled training classes in your area,

but need to recertify by next June?

Come join our class in Scottsdale!

When: March 31- April 2Where: Alcor Central (Scottsdale, AZ)Course: Basic Certification Modules:

For More Information:Contact Linda Chamberlain,

CryoTransport Manager800-367-2228 or [email protected]

Basic ACT Certification modules:

1. Infection Control2. Checklists and Operations Management3. CPS and Cooling4. Transport Medications5. Coordination and Communications

Current CPR card is a prerequisite.


FundCryonic Suspension

Affordably wih Life Insurance

Rudi HoffmanCertified Financial Planner

Investments, Financial Services, MutualFunds, Insurance, Annuities, Living Trusts

P.O. Box 290549, Port Orange, FL 32127E-mail: [email protected]

1-800-749-3773

Cryonics magazine reserves the right to accept or reject ads at our own discretion, and assumes no responsibility for their content or theconsequences of answering these advertisements. The rate is $8.00 per line per issue (our lines are considered to be 66 columns wide). Tip-in rates per sheet are $140 (printed one side) or $180 (printed both sides), from camera-ready copy.

PERIASTRONPublishing for immortalists since 1990

Now both a newsletter and a book!

*PERIASTRON, the bimonthly newsleter, keeps youup on scientific and technical advances bearing oncryonics. Only $3.00 per issue. Try it for one issue,you’ll like it!

*A GUIDE TO ANTIAGING DRUGS, the book, tellsyou both the good and bad of each one. And it can beupdated as we larn more! Send for free brochure.

PERIASTRON80 Q Cabrillo hwy #247, Half Moon Bay, CA 94019

NanoTechnology Magazine

NanoTechnology Magazine is your win-dow into the emerging technologywhose awesome power mankind will ac-quire, for good or evil, very early in thenext century. Everything will changeradically...the industrial revolution wasjust a preview. Find out about the mil-lions already spent by government andprivate labs on the atomic manipulationof matter. Follow monthly discoveriestoward the evolution of the technologysure to dominate the 21st. century. Pre-pare yourself mentally withNanoTechnology Magazine.

Venturist Monthly News promotesimmortalist philosophy. For free samplewrite: The Venturists; 15111 N. HaydenRd., Ste. 160-169, Scottsdale, AZ 85260

EXTROPY: The Journal ofTranshumanist Thought #17

Amara Graps interviews Dr. FiorellaTerenzi; The Heat Death of Tim Leary;What’s Wrong with “CyberspaceIndepenence?”; Anti-Aging andNanotechnology conference reports; andmuch more. 68pp, $5; $17 for one-year(4 issue) sub, $32 for 2 years, fromExtropy Institute, 13428 Maxella Avenue,#273, Marina del Rey, CA 90292. [email protected]

MARY NAPLES, CLU and BOB GILMORE CRYONICS INSURANCE

SPECIALISTS.Over the past 10 years, Mary Naples andBob Gilmore have underwritten more in-surance policies for cryonics fundingthan any other group of agents. If you’relooking for fast, dependable service, callthem today!

MARY NAPLES, CLU and BOB GILMORE

4600 Bohannon Drive, Suite 100Menlo Park, CA 94025.

(800) 645-3338.

1-year subscription: $38.40 (check, M.O., or Credit Card).

NanoTechnology Magazine4451 Sierra Dr.

Honolulu, HI 96816(808) 737-0628 fax (808) 739-5145

http://planet-hawaii.com/nanozine

If you had the pleasure of attend-ing Extro 3 (August 9-10, San Jose,CA), you may have heard EricDrexler’s speech on “Conservatism”at the banquet on Saturday night.For those of you who didn’t, Dr.Drexler offered some simple yetcogent reasoning: Since medicalscience continues to advance, a“conservative” thinker does not as-sume that any current medicalcondition will remain permanentlyincurable. When faced with deathfrom aging or illness, such an in-dividual would “conserve” him-self in the best manner available,until technology offered suitable

treatments. [Please forgive the clumsyparaphrasing, Eric. --ed.] So compel-ling did Dr. Drexler find this reasoning,he announced publicly that he had madethis type of conservative arrangementfor himself.

But then most of you probablyalready guessed that Eric Drexler, au-thor of Engines of Creation, was anAlcor suspension member.

The next day of Extro 3, after apanel featuring Artificial Intelligence

theorist Marvin Minsky, Dr.Drexler again made a speech: “Ihave long wondered how I wouldexplain the absence of the headof my dissertation committee topeople in the future. Now, I won’thave to do so.” He then pre-sented Dr. Minsky with a newAlcor bracelet and necktag set,officially initiating him as an Alcorsuspension member.

If other brilliant minds like Drexler and Minsky choose cryonics, shouldn’t you? Sign up with the cryonics organization of your choice today!


Cryobiology and the Feasibility of CryonicsThe Molecular Repair of the Brain, by Ralph Merkle, Ph.D. ............................................................................................. $ 3.00Will Cryonics Work? by Steve Harris, M.D, plus Why Cryonics Probably Will Work, by Michael Perry, Ph.D. ...... $ 3.50Freezing of Living Cells, Mechanisms and Implications, by Peter Mazur, Ph.D. ......................................................... $ 2.50“Cryobiology and the Feasibility of Cryonics Package” (all 4 of the above articles) ................................................. $ 7.50

NanotechnologyThere’s Plenty of Room at the Bottom, by Richard P. Feynman, Ph.D. ........................................................................ $ 1.50Molecular Technology and Cell Repair Machines, by K. Eric Drexler, Ph.D. ............................................................... $ 2.00Nanotechnology, by Brian Wowk .......................................................................................................................................... $ 2.50Cell Repair Technology, by Brian Wowk ............................................................................................................................. $ 2.50“Nanotechnology Package” (all 4 of the above articles) .................................................................................................. $ 7.00

Memory, Identity, and the BrainThe Terminus of the Self, by Max More............................................................................................................................... $ 3.00A Commented Bibliography on Brain and Memory, by Thomas Donaldson, Ph.D. .................................................... $ 2.00Isn’t That You Behind Those Foster Grants?, by David Krieger ..................................................................................... $ 1.50Neurosuspension: Head First Into the Future, by Steve Bridge ..................................................................................... $ 1.00

Cryonic Suspension ReportsHer Blue Eyes Will Sparkle, by Linda Chamberlain ...........................................................................................................$ 2.00A Well-Loved Man, by Mary Margaret Glennie ..................................................................................................................$ 2.00

Alcor Legal HistoryOur Finest Hours: Notes on the Dora Kent Crisis, by R. Michael Perry, Ph.D. .............................................................$ 2.50Motion for Award of Attorneys’ Fees, by David Epstein ...................................................................................................$ 2.50

GeneralElements of a Cryonics Patient Transport, by Tanya Jones ........................................................................................... $ 2.00Frozen Souls: Can a Religious Person Choose Cryonics?, by Steve Bridge ............................................................. $ 1.50Lovecraft, Scientific Horror, Alienation, and Cryonics, by Steve Harris, M.D. ............................................................ $ 1.50Cryonics in Popular Culture, by Steve Neal ....................................................................................................................... $ 2.00“Why We Are Cryonicists” and “Alcor: The Origin of Our Name” ................................................................................... FreeWhy Cryonics Can Work (brochure) ..................................................................................................................................... $ 0.75Cryonics and Christianity (brochure) .................................................................................................................................... $ 0.75

ORDER FORMAll prices include postage and handling and are in U.S. dollars. Minimum order: $5.00. Overseas orders must be paid withU.S. dollars by Traveler’s Cheques or International Money Order, and must include an additional 20% (of total) for shipping.

All orders are subject to availability and all prices are subject to change.

Discount Package (All of the above Articles and Reprints) .............................................. $ 35.00

The literature above can be ordered by mailing in this form with a check or money orderor credit card authorization (Visa/MC), or by telephone (Visa/MC only) by calling Alcor: 1-602-922-9013 or by FAX: 1-602-922-9027.

NAME____________________________________________PHONE______________________________________________

ADDRESS________________________________________CITY____________________________STATE______ZIP__________

VISA/MC# (circle one)____________________________________________________________EXP___________

SIGNATURE (credit card orders only)____________________________________________________________________

Send your order to:

Alcor Foundation7895 E. Acoma Dr., #110

Scottsdale, AZ 85260-6916

SUBTOTAL:___________+20% if overseas

TOTAL:___________

Cryonics Magazine, 1-year (4 issues) SubscriptionUnited States ................................................................... $ 15.00Canada/Mexico ............................................................... $ 20.00Outside North America ................................................... $ 25.00Cryonics back issues on disk/fiche (circle) ............... $120.00

The Alcor Phoenix, 1-year (8-issue) SubscriptionUnited States ....................................................................$ 20.00All other countries ............................................................$ 25.00

Books & MediaCryonics: Reaching For Tomorrow ................................$12 .95Engines of Creation, by Eric Drexler .............................$10 .95The Prospect of Immortality, by R. Ettinger .................$11 .00The 120-Year Diet, by Roy Walford ...............................$ 5.95Chiller, fiction by Sterling Blake .....................................$ 5.95Becoming Immortal, by Wes DuCharme ......................$20 .00Tech Heaven, by Linda Nagata .....................................$ 4.99Videotape : Immortality on Ice (Discovery Channel)......$22.00Videotape: 1997 ACT Festival (Merkle/Muhlestein)........$10.00

ARTICLES

and

REPRINTS

&

Alcor Membership Application Package.........................FreeAlcor Suspension Membership

Alcor Membership Application Fee ............................. $150.00

Cryonics Magazine 1998-1

Documents

Transcript of Cryonics Magazine 1998-1