Category Archives: Cryonics

Invitation to the Annual General Meeting of the Cryonics Institute & Immortalist Society 3 P.M. Sunday, September 11th, 2016

The Annual General Meeting (AGM) of the Cryonics Institute will be held at 3PM on Sunday, September 11th, 2016 at the CI facility, 24355 Sorrentino Court, Clinton Township, Michigan 48035 (USA). The AGM of the Immortalist Society will be held after the CI AGM on the same day at the same location. The two meetings generally last most of the afternoon. A buffet dinner & social follow. The CI facility will be open to guests and visitors one hour before the meeting begins.

Meetings offer an excellent opportunity to see the facility, to meet other members, to get a sense of the status of the Cryonics Institute & Immortalist Society and to see Officers, Directors & Staff. For those who come a day early, an informal dinner will be held on Saturday evening at a local restaurant.

Agenda items for the CI AGM will include Presidents Report, Treasurers Report, and Investment report as well as business issues that arise. The winners of the CI Board of Director election will be announced. There will be tours of the CI Facility. There is no charge for the buffet dinner, but we need to know how much food to order.

The AGMs are open to the general public. We request that we be informed if you wish to attend. For driving directions, more meeting information and to confirm attendance, send e-mail to CIHQ@aol.com, phone (586) 791-5961 or write to the above address. Night Before Dinner Invite

CI members & the public are welcome to join us the night before the official CI AGM at Ike's restaurant for a casual dinner and drinks. (All food include Vegan option) We will meet Saturday, September 10, 2016 at 6pm at ike's Restaurant, 38550, Van Dyke Avenue, Sterling Heights (MI) 48312, near the Cryonics Institute. For more information and directions http://www.ikesrestaurant.com/location.php We hope to see you there. Best Regards, Stephan Beauregard, CI Director (Communication & Social Media)

Here is the original post:
Cryonics Institute | Facebook

(and some possible solutions)

When you buy a house, the seller is legally obliged to disclose any known defects. When you review a company's annual report, it tells you every problem that could affect the corporate share value. Since arrangements for cryopreservation may have a much greater impact on your life than home ownership or stock investments, we feel an ethical obligation to disclose problems that affect cryonics in general and Alcor specifically. We also believe that an organization which admits its problems is more likely to address them than an organization which pretends it has none. Thus full disclosure should encourage, rather than discourage, consumer confidence.

As of 2016, Alcor is over 40 years old. Our Patient Care Trust Fund is endowed with more than 9 million dollars and is responsible for the long-term care of over 100 cryopatients. In almost every year since its inception Alcor has enjoyed positive membership growth. We are the largest cryonics organization in the world yet in many respects we are still a startup company. We have fewer than a dozen employees in Scottsdale, Arizona and approximately 20 part-time independent contractors in various locations around the USA, mostly dedicated to emergency standby and rescue efforts. We serve just over 1,000 members and the protocols that aid our pursuit of the goal of reversible suspended animation continue to be developed. At the present time the technology required for the realization of our goal far exceeds current technical capabilities. Cryonics will not be comparable with mainstream medicine until our patients can be revived using contemporary technology, and we expect to wait for decades to see this vision fulfilled. Nevertheless, we have made important progress by introducing brain vitrification to improve patient tissue structure preservation.

Alcor shares some of the characteristics of startup companies. The organization is understaffed in some important areas and lacks as much capitalization as would be desired to support maximum growth. Limited resources prevent the organization from hiring as many highly qualified and experienced personnel as desired, and sometimes we have to postpone enhancements to equipment and procedures.

Because Alcor must react quickly to circumstances, it cannot always handle multiple tasks simultaneously. We feel a significant impact if, for example, several members experience legal death in quick succession. A heavy caseload generally means that administrative and even technical development work is postponed while member emergencies take precedence.

On the other hand, Alcor staff believe very strongly in the mission of the organization and are extremely dedicated. Alcor transport team members are dedicated to saving lives through cryonics, and behave accordingly. Most of all, everyone at Alcor is concerned with ensuring the security of the cryopreserved patients. The organization's powerful sense of purpose is reinforced by the fact that all Alcor directors and most staff members have made arrangements to be cryopreserved themselves in the future.

Unlike most startups, Alcor is unlikely to fail for financial reasons. Due to the legally independent status of the Patient Care Trust from Alcor, patients can be maintained indefinitely through its portfolio of cash, investments, real estate, and capital equipment. Some wealthy Alcor members have contributed gifts and endowments to help the organization to advance, and in the event of a financial crisis, many of the people who hope ultimately to be cryopreserved would probably provide assistance. In this sense Alcor benefits from its small size, since it maintains an intimate relationship with many members which would be more problematic if our membership was ten times as large.

Inability to Verify Results

When a conventional surgical procedure is successful, usually the patient recovers and is cured. If the same surgical procedure is unsuccessful or a surgeon makes a serious error, the patient may die. These clear outcomes provide prompt feedback for the people involved. A physician may feel deeply satisfied if a life is saved, or may be deeply troubled (and may be sued for malpractice) if errors cause a death that should have been avoidable.

Clear feedback of this type does not exist in cryonics, because the outcome of our procedures will not be known definitively until decades or even a century from now. We have good reason to expect future technologies capable of repairing cellular damage in cryonics patients will be developed, but we feel equally certain that if a patient experiences very severe brain damage prior to cryopreservation, repairs may be delayed, may be incomplete, or may be impossible. The dividing line between between positive and negative outcomes can be unclear at this time.

Suppose a patient experiences 30 minutes of warm ischemia (lack of blood flow at near-normal body temperature) after legal death occurs. Will this downtime create damage that is irreversible by any imaginable technology? Probably not. But what if the ischemic interval lasts for an hour or two hours, or a day? We simply don't know where to draw the line between one patient who is potentially viable, and another who is not.

Of course we can refer to experimental work that has evaluated the injury which occurs when cells are deprived of essential nutrients. These studies provide some guidance regarding the likely damage that a patient may experience, but they still cannot tell us with certainty if future science will be able to reverse that damage.

Another problem afflicting cryonics cases is that many uncontrolled variables prevent us from developing objective criteria to compare one case with another. Consider these two examples:

In the first case, will the long transport time negate the advantage of a rapid initial response and replacement of blood with a chilled preservation solution? In the second case, will the initial hours of warm ischemia outweigh the advantage of the rapid transport to Alcor? We can make educated guesses, but we cannot answer these questions definitively. We have no certain way of knowing which case will work out better, because we have no evidence no outcome.

We do have some simple ways to determine if a patient's circulatory system allows good perfusion with cryoprotectant. Personnel in the operating room will notice if blood clots emerge when perfusion begins. The surface of the brain, visible through burr holes which are created to enable observation, should be pearly white in color. The brain should shrink slightly as water is replaced with cryoprotectant. When perfusion is complete the patient's features should have acquired a sallow color indicating that cryoprotectant has diffused through the tissues.

These simple observations are helpful, but still the people who work hard to minimize transport time and maximize the rate of cooling can never enjoy the satisfying payoff that a physician receives when one of his patients recovers and returns to a normal, active life. This lack of positive outcome can cause feelings of frustration and futility, sometimes leading to disillusionment and burnout.

Conversely, if a case goes badly, team members will be protected from negative feedback. A team leader can never say to one of the personnel, "Because of your error, the patient has no chance of recovery."

The lack of a clear outcome also prevents us from refuting people who claim that future science will be able to undo almost any degree of damage. The danger of this extreme positive thinking is that it can lead to laziness. Why bother to make heroic efforts to minimize injury, if nanotechnology will fix everything?

Alcor's stated policy firmly rejects this attitude. Team members are very highly motivated to minimize injury because we believe that our members should not bet their lives on unknown capabilities of future science. Alcor generally hosts a debriefing after each case, encouraging all participants to share complaints, frustrations, and suggestions for improvement. Ideally, each case should be a learning experience, and participants should welcome criticism as an opportunity to identify weaknesses and overcome them in the future.

Still the lack of a clear outcome remains one of the biggest weaknesses in cryonics, since it encourages complacency and prevents accountability. The antidote to this problem is a better set of objective criteria to evaluate cases, and Alcor is working in consultation with brain ischemia experts to develop such criteria.

Volunteer Help

During the 1960s the first cryonics organizations were run entirely by volunteers. The field was not sufficiently reputable to attract qualified medical staff, and no one could have paid for professional help anyway.

Today cryonics is making a transition to professionalism, but financial limitations are prolonging the process. Some paramedics are associated with Alcor, and we hope for more in the future. We have an MD medical director, access to three contract surgeons, access to a hospice nurse, and assistance from an ischemia research laboratory in California where staff has extensive experience in relevant procedures such as vascular cannulation and perfusion. Alcor also communicates with a cryobiology laboratory that has made the most important advances in organ preservation during the past decade. Still, most transport team members who work remotely from the facility are volunteers who receive a week or two of training and modest payment for their work.

In the future, as Alcor becomes more financially secure and is able to offer higher salaries, the organization will attract more medical professionals. At this time, the transition is incomplete.

Limited Support from Mainstream Science

In the 1960s scientists in mainstream laboratories investigated techniques to cryopreserve whole organs. By the end of the 1970s most of this work had ended, and the field of cryobiology separated itself very emphatically from cryonics. The Society for Cryobiology has discouraged scientists from doing work that could advance cryonics, and has adopted a bylaw that threatens to expel any member who practices or promotes cryonics. Consequently the few scientists who are willing to do cryonics-related research live in fear of being excluded from the scientific specialty that is most relevant to their work.

The rift between cryonics and cryobiology may have been caused initially by fears among mainstream scientists that cryonics had a "tabloid journalism" flavor incompatible with science. In addition many scientists have been dissatisfied with the idea of applying procedures without a complete and full understanding of their outcome. Generally, in medicine, first a technique is studied, validated, and perfected, and then it is applied clinically. Cryonics has, of necessity, done an end-run around this formal approach by rushing to apply a technique based on theoretical arguments rather than validated clinical effectiveness.

During the past decade our knowledge and procedures have advanced far beyond the crude freezing methods imagined by most cryobiologists, and experts in molecular nanotechnology have voiced strong support. As more papers are published describing technical advances, we expect that cryobiologists and other scientists will revise their negative assessment of cryonics. In the future we believe that the arbitrary barrier between cryonics and cryobiology will gradually dissolve, and cryonics research will be recognized as a legitimate specialty of the field. However, for the time being the dim view taken of cryonics by most cryobiologists remains problematic, impairing Alcor's ability to achieve respectable status among other relevant groups such as prospective members, regulatory officials, and legislators.

Limited Legal and Government Support

Cryonics is not explicitly recognized in the laws of any state in the United States (see The Legal Status of Cryonics Patients). This does not mean that cryonics is illegal or unregulated. In fact, Alcor must comply with state laws controlling the transport and disposition of human remains, and we make arrangements with licensed morticians to insure that these requirements are met. Alcor also complies with federal regulations established by agencies such as OSHA and EPA.

Still, the lack of specific enabling legislation for cryonics can cause problems. In the late 1980s the California Department of Health Services (DHS) asserted that because there was no statutory procedure for becoming a cryonics organization, human remains could not be conveyed to a cryonics organization via the Uniform Anatomical Gift Act (UAGA), and therefore cryonics was illegal. Fortunately, the courts were unimpressed by this argument. In 1992 the legality of cryonics, and the legality of using the UAGA for cryonics, were upheld at the appellate level.

In 1990 the Canadian province of British Columbia enacted a law that specifically banned the sale of cryonics services in that province. In 2002 the Solicitor General (Canadian equivalent of a state Attorney General) issued a written clarification stating that the law only prohibited funeral homes from selling cryonics arrangements. Cryonics could still be performed in the province, even with the paid assistance of funeral homes, provided they were not involved in the direct sale of cryonics. This position is affirmed by the Business Practices and Consumer Protection Authority of British Columbia. Despite these assurances, anxiety about the law remains.

In 2004 a bill was passed by the Arizona House of Representatives to place cryonics and cryonics procedures under the regulation of the state funeral board. In its original form this law would have prevented our use of the UAGA. The bill was ultimately withdrawn, but may be revived at a later date. Very hostile comments were made about cryonics during the floor debate of this bill. We cannot guarantee that any future legislation will be friendly to cryonics or will permit cryonics to continue in Arizona.

Despite these uncertainties, the United States enjoys a strong cultural tradition to honor the wishes of terminal patients. We believe that the freedom to choose cryonics is constitutionally protected, and so far courts have agreed. We are hopeful that we will be able to continue performing cryonics without technical compromise, under state supervision where necessary, for the indefinite future.

Limited Mainstream Medical Support

Cryonics is not an accepted or recognized "therapy" in the general medical community. To the average medical professional, cryonics is at best an unusual anatomical donation. At worst it can be viewed by some physicians as fraud upon their patient. Hospitals have sometimes deliberately delayed pronouncement of legal death, delayed release of patients to Alcor, or forbade the use of cryonics life support equipment or medications within their facilities. On one occasion in 1988 Alcor had to obtain a court order to compel a hospital to release a patient to Alcor promptly at legal death and permit our stabilization procedures on their premises.

Relations with hospitals and their staff are not always difficult. Usually when nurses and physicians learn that cryonics is a sincere practice that is overseen by other medical professionals, they will be willing to accommodate a patient's wishes, or at least will not interfere with them. Sometimes medical staff will even assist with cryonics procedures such as administering medications and performing chest compressions if Alcor personnel are not present when legal death occurs.

The lack of formal medical recognition or support for cryonics generally means that cryonics patients remote from Alcor must be moved to a mortuary for blood replacement before transport to Alcor. Ideally these preparatory procedures should be performed within hospitals, not mortuaries. Hospitals presently allow organ procurement personnel to harvest organs from deceased patients (a fairly elaborate procedure) within their walls. We are hopeful that similar privileges will be extended to cryonics more often as the process becomes better understood and accepted, but we cannot predict how quickly this change will occur.

High Incidence of Poor Cases

In more than 50 percent of cryonics cases legal death occurs before Alcor standby personnel can be deployed, and is often followed by hours of warm ischemia. This downtime may cause severe cellular damage.

The threat of autopsy, in which the brain is routinely dissected, is an even greater danger. Any person who suffers legal death under unexpected circumstances, especially involving accidents or foul play, is liable to be autopsied. Alcor strongly urges members living in California, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, and Ohio to sign Religious Objection to Autopsy forms.

Sometimes cryonicists perish under circumstances resulting in complete destruction or disappearance of their remains. Cryonicists have been lost at sea, suffered misadventures abroad, or even disappeared without a trace. Two members of cryonics organizations were lost in the 2001 collapse of the World Trade Center towers. One was a policeman performing rescue operations.

Cryonics is not a panacea or a "cure" for death. The cryonics ideal of immediate cooling and cardiopulmonary support following cardiac arrest cannot be achieved in the majority of cases. We have good reasons to believe that molecular records of memory persist in the brain even after hours of clinical death, but only future physicians using medical technology which we do not yet possess will be able to determine, finally, whether such a person is really still "there."

What can be done?

If you are:

...then please contact us at .

...or check out our volunteer opportunities.

Here is the original post:
Problems Associated with Cryonics - Cryonics: Alcor Life ...

"Space Seed" is an episode of the American science fiction television series Star Trek. It is the 23rd episode of the first season and was first broadcast by NBC on February 16, 1967. "Space Seed" was written by Gene L. Coon and Carey Wilber and directed by Marc Daniels. Set in the 23rd century, the series follows the adventures of Captain James T. Kirk (William Shatner) and his crew aboard the Starfleet starship USS Enterprise. In this episode, the Enterprise crew encounter a sleeper ship holding selectively bred superpeople from Earth's past. Their leader, Khan Noonien Singh (Ricardo Montalbn), attempts to take control of Enterprise. The episode also guest stars Madlyn Rhue as Lt.Marla McGivers, who becomes romantically involved with Khan.

Wilber conceived the general plot for a different series, Captain Video and His Video Rangers, which featured humans from Ancient Greece who were preserved in cryogenic suspension and revived. The script changed numerous times during preproduction as producer Bob Justman felt that it would be too expensive to film. Eventually Gene L.Coon and series creator Gene Roddenberry also made alterations. These revisions include the marooning of the criminals at the end of the episode, and the change of the primary villain from a Nordic character to a Sikh. Roddenberry attempted to claim the primary writing credit for "Space Seed", a request turned down by the Writers Guild of America.

Montalbn was the casting director's first choice for Khan and described the role as "wonderful".[2] Despite being planned as an inexpensive bottle episode, the special sets and shots using starship miniatures caused the episode to go over budget. On first broadcast, the episode held second place in the ratings for the first half-hour with 13.12 million viewers, but during the second half it was pushed into third place. "Space Seed" has been named one of the best episodes of the series by Cinefantastique, IGN, and other publications. The 1982 film Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan serves as a sequel to this episode. Plot elements of the episode and The Wrath of Khan were also used in the 2013 film Star Trek Into Darkness, and references to it appear in episodes of Star Trek: Enterprise.

On stardate 3141.9, the Federation starship USS Enterprise finds the derelict SS Botany Bay floating in space. Botany Bay was launched from Earth in the 1990s. A landing party comprising Captain James T. Kirk (William Shatner), Doctor Leonard McCoy (DeForest Kelley), Chief Engineer Montgomery Scott (James Doohan), and historian Lieutenant Marla McGivers (Madlyn Rhue) beams over to the freighter. The landing party finds a cargo of 84 humans, 72 of whom are alive in suspended animation after nearly 200years. McGivers identifies the group's leader. The occupant begins to revive, but Kirk brings him to Enterprise for a medical examination when his chamber fails.

Kirk has Botany Bay taken in tow by a tractor beam, and Enterprise sets course for Starbase12. In sickbay, the group's leader awakens and attacks McCoy but, impressed by McCoy's bravery, releases the doctor and introduces himself as "Khan" (Ricardo Montalbn). Lt.McGivers marvels over Khan, a living relic from the 20th century, her field of interest. First Officer Spock (Leonard Nimoy) discovers that their guest is Khan Noonien Singh who, along with his people, are products of 20th-century selective breeding designed to create perfect humans. The genetic superhumans instead became warlords and conquered more than a third of the planet, sparking the Eugenics Wars, Earth's last major global conflict. Between eighty and ninety of the superhumans were unaccounted for at the end of the war; Khan is listed as the most dangerous.

Khan is placed under guard in quarters. McGivers is sent to brief him on current events. Taking advantage of McGivers' attraction towards him, Khan tells her he means to rule mankind again and needs her help to take over Enterprise. Reluctantly, she agrees, beaming Khan to Botany Bay, where he revives the rest of his superpeople. They return to Enterprise and assume control of the ship. Khan throws Kirk into a decompression tank, and threatens to slowly suffocate him unless Kirk's command crew agree to follow Khan. Having a change of heart, McGivers frees Kirk from the chamber. Kirk and Spock vent anesthetic gas throughout the entire ship to disable Khan and his cohorts. Khan escapes the gas and heads to Engineering, where he attempts to destroy Enterprise, but Kirk confronts him and a brawl ensues. Though outmatched by Khan's superior strength, Kirk pulls an odd rod-like tool (never seen before or since, in this episode or the entire series) from a wall and uses it as a club to knock the superman unconscious.

Kirk holds a hearing to decide the fate of Khan and his followers. The captain decides that they should be exiled to Ceti AlphaV, a harsh world that Kirk believes would be a perfect place for Khan to start his kingdom. Khan claims he is up to the challenge of taming the world and accepts Kirk's offer. Instead of a court-martial for Lt.McGivers, Kirk allows her to go into exile with Khan. Spock notes that it would be interesting to see what Khan makes of Ceti AlphaV in 100years.

Carey Wilber was hired to write a script for an episode of Star Trek. His idea was based on an episode he wrote for the television series Captain Video and His Video Rangers (19491955). His work on that show featured Ancient-Greek-era humans transported in suspended animation through space, with the people of the future finding that they have mythological powers. For "Space Seed", Wilber replaced these mythological powers with abilities that were enhanced due to genetic engineering.[3] Wilber had briefly worked with Gene Roddenberry on the television series Harbormaster. His science fiction extended beyond Star Trek: he also wrote scripts for Lost in Space and The Time Tunnel around the same time.[2][4]

In Wilber's first proposal for the story that became "Space Seed", dated August 29, 1966shortly before the first episode of Star Trek aired[5]the villain was Harold Erickson, an ordinary criminal exiled into space. He sought to free his gang from Botany Bay, seize Enterprise, and become a pirate.[4] Parts of the story were inspired by the use of penal colonies in the 18th century, and characterizations were based on descriptions from the series' writer's bible. As a result, several elements of the draft proposal differed from how the characters behaved in the actual seriesfor example, the draft includes a scene where Spock defeats Kirk at chess by cheating.[5] Producer Gene L.Coon told Wilber that his work was the best outline he had seen during his time on Star Trek. Fellow producer Bob Justman was less enthusiastic; he compared it negatively to Flash Gordon and Buck Rogers, and felt the concept would be too expensive to film. There were also concerns that an unsolicited script submitted by science fiction author Philip Jos Farmer resembled the proposed plot which, as Roddenberry had corresponded with Farmer, might lead to litigation.[4]

NBC executives reviewed the plot for "Space Seed" and approved it, but Justman reassessed the outline, saying that it needed to be heavily revised.[6] In September, Wilber was given a list of suggested changes including asking him to remove any mention of the setting, as the producers did not want to say how far in the future Star Trek was set, and to remove the chess scene.[5] Wilber submitted a second draft, but Roddenberry still had problems with basic elements of the script. He did not believe common criminals would be fired into space as a solution and strongly disliked the notion of space pirates.[6][7] The second draft introduced the idea that Kirk marooned Erickson and his crew on a new planet; this remained in the final version.[8] Wilber was not asked for a third draft; Coon was tasked with the re-write;[9] he submitted it on December 7 and updated it twice over the following five days.[10] Wilber accepted Coon's re-writes, and left the staff after the submission of his second draft as his contractual obligations were complete.[2]

Coon proposed that Erickson should be a rival to Kirk, a genetic superman who had once ruled part of Earth.[11] Roddenberry and Justman were still unhappy with the script, and Roddenberry revised it once more a week before filming was due to begin, after Montalbn had been cast.[9][12] In this draft the blond Nordic character of Erickson became closer to the version seen on screen.[9] In Roddenberry and Coon's script, the character was renamed Sibahl Khan Noonien. The name Govin Bahadur Singh was suggested by the DeForest Research company, who checked scripts for potential errors on behalf of the production company; the Singh name was suggested in part because it was closer to actual Sikh names. Coon and Roddenberry settled on Khan Noonien Singh; Roddenberry had an old Chinese friend named Noonien Wang that he had lost touch with, and hoped that Wang would see the episode and contact him.[12] In the final draft, Roddenberry listed himself as the primary writer, Coon as co-writer and Wilber was absent, but the Writers Guild of America turned down Roddenberry's request to be credited; Coon received the main credit; Wilber was given co-writer and "story-by" credits.[9] Wilber did not often watch his own work, and nearly thirty years later had never seen "Space Seed".[2] Coon was later credited as Lee Cronin for his part in production of the script.[13]

Mexican actor Ricardo Montalbn was cast as the genetic superman Khan Noonian Singh, having been the first choice for the role.[2][14] He had been suggested by casting director Joseph D'Agosta, who was not looking to cast an actor of a particular ethnic background due to Roddenberry's vision for the series; Roddenberry wanted to show his perceived 23rd century values by not requiring any specific ethnicities when casting actors in guest roles.[8] Montalbn had previously appeared in a television movie created by Roddenberry, The Secret Weapon of 117 (also referred to as The Secret Defense of 117),[2][14] which was the writer's first attempt to create science fiction on television and aired more than ten years before Star Trek.[15] Montalbn called his role as Khan "wonderful",[2] saying that "it was well-written, it had an interesting concept and I was delighted it was offered to me".[2] The main cast were enthusiastic about working with Montalbn; DeForest Kelley later said "I enjoyed working with Ricardo the best. I was privileged. He is a marvelous actor."[16]

Madlyn Rhue, who portrayed Lt.Marla McGivers, had previously worked with Montalbn in an episode of Bonanza in 1960 as his on-screen wife; she later appeared with him in a 1982 episode of Fantasy Island.[8][14] Montalbn and Rhue also appeared in separate episodes of Roddenberry's previous NBC television series, The Lieutenant (19631964). Main cast member George Takei did not appear in "Space Seed"; the character of Hikaru Sulu was replaced by Blaisdell Makee as Lt.Spinelli. It was the first of two appearances in Star Trek for Makee, who would return in the episode "The Changeling" as Lt.Singh. John Winston appeared for the second time as Lt.Kyle, and would go on to make nine further episodic appearances in that role. Following positive feedback from the producers and the network regarding James Doohan, "Space Seed" was the first episode to feature a more prominent role for his character, Chief Engineer Montgomery Scott.[14]

Filming of "Space Seed" began December 15, 1966, and concluded on December 22 after six days of shooting.[14] Roddenberry, Coon and Wilber's rewrites resulted in a shooting script of nearly 60pages and 120scenes.[17]Marc Daniels was hired to direct the episode; he had previously worked on The Lieutenant.[18] The first day's filming coincided with the airing of the episode "Balance of Terror", and Daniels allowed the cast and crew to go home early to watch it.[19] The other five days ran to schedule, to the extent that there was an early finish on the final day of filming, allowing cast and crew time to return home to watch a repeat of the episode "What Are Little Girls Made Of?" which had replaced "Arena" on that evening's schedule.[20] A scene filmed but later cut from the episode depicted a discussion between McGivers and Angela Martine (Barbara Baldavin), intended to show that McGivers was looking for a forceful man.[19] Further scenes were trimmed after filming following input from NBC. For example, scenes shot on the Botany Bay were cut as executives felt the costumes worn by the newly awakened crew were too revealing.[19][20]

The character of Khan required five costumes, more than any other guest star in the entire series. This meant that the staff working on costumes had less time to devote to any one costume. Montalbn's athletic physique was such that when his measurements were passed to them, staff thought there had been a mistake. Costume designer William Ware Theiss found it challenging to produce the outfits in the time allotted, to make the materials seem suitably futuristic and to fit his own preferences in design. Two of Khan's outfits re-used previous costumes, while three were specifically created for Montalbn.[17] The production built two new sets for the episode: the decompression chamber in sickbay, and the set on board Botany Bay.[19] A doorframe from that set was later reused as an overhead unit in McCoy's research lab, which appeared later in the series.[21]

Post production on "Space Seed" began on December 23, 1966, and ran through February 5 the following year. The Westheimer Company produced the majority of effects in the episode, but the scenes of Enterprise and Botany Bay in space were produced by Film Effects of Hollywood who were not credited on screen for their work. Botany Bay utilized a design Matt Jefferies created prior to the USS Enterprise. It had been previously labeled "antique space freighter",[20] and was built by Film Effects of Hollywood.[18] The creation of the ship miniature caused the episode to go over budget by more than $12,000; "Space Seed" actually cost a total of $197,262 against a budget of $180,000. By this point, the series was nearly $80,000 over budget in total.[16] The Botany Bay model was later re-purposed as a freighter for the episode "The Ultimate Computer".[21]

The sound effects team borrowed effects and manipulated them in order to achieve the "painted sound" effect sought by Roddenberry.[16][20] Although a number of sources were used, they attempted to avoid most science fiction television series as they wanted an authentic sound. The sound archive of the United States Air Force was used, although the photon torpedo sound was created from the 1953 film The War of the Worlds.[16] "Space Seed" was awarded the Golden Reel for sound editing on television by the Motion Picture Sound Editors society.[16]

"Space Seed" was first broadcast in the United States on February 16, 1967, on NBC. A 12-city overnight Trendex report compiled by Nielsen ratings showed that during the first half-hour, it held second place in the ratings behind Bewitched on ABC with 13.12million viewers compared to Bewitched's 14.44million. The episode beat My Three Sons on CBS. During the second half-hour it was pushed into third place in the ratings by the start of the Thursday Night Movie on CBS, the Western film One-Eyed Jacks starring Marlon Brando, which received 35.5percent of the audience share compared to 28percent for "Space Seed".[16]

A High Definition remastering of "Space Seed", which introduced new special effects and starship exteriors as well as enhanced music and audio, was shown for the first time on November 18, 2006, in broadcast syndication. It was the eleventh remastered episode to be shown.[22] This meant that the episode was made available to over 200 local stations across the United States with the rights to broadcast Star Trek, and depending on the station it was broadcast either on November 18 or 19.[23]

In 1967, The Indiana Gazette described "Space Seed" as "a good piece of science fiction".[24] The Kokomo Tribune called it "imaginative", and also said that the episode was "particularly interesting" for "its commentary on the scientific know-how of the late 1990s".[25]

Later reviewers watched the episodes several decades after broadcast. Zack Handlen of The A.V. Club gave the episode an 'A' rating, noting its strong characters and the interplay between Kirk and Spock that emphasizes their friendship.[26] Michelle Erica Green called the episode "legendary" in her review for TrekNation. She thought that Khan made the "perfect foil" for the trio of Kirk, Spock and McCoy and said that the episode was not dulled by later episodes and films based on "Space Seed".[27] In Mark Pickavance's review at Den of Geek, he said that it remained an "obvious choice of great source material" to be followed up in a film.[28]

The review by Eugene Myers and Torrie Atkinson on Tor.com criticized the attraction between McGivers and Khan, saying that it was "really uncomfortable to watch her immediate attraction to him and her easy acceptance of his abusive and controlling behaviour".[29] However, both praised the episode, Myers giving it a five out of six, and Atkinson a six out of six rating.[29] Also at Tor.com, in Ryan Britt and Emily Asher-Perrin's list of the ten most under-appreciated elements of Star Trek, they placed "Space Seed" at number three saying that "As an introductory story to what old school Star Trek was all about, 'Space Seed' is perfect. It presents an original science fiction concept, grapples with notions of human technology and ingenuity creating a monster, and features Captain Kirk beating the crap out of someone with a piece of Styrofoam. What more could you want?"[30]

Entertainment Weekly named the episode the second best of the series,[31] while IGN ranked "Space Seed" as the fourth best, praising the fist fight between Kirk and Khan.[32] It appeared in the top ten episodes listed by Cinefantastique and was also included in a list of ten "must see" episodes on The A.V. Club.[16][33] Reviewer Zack Handlen said that it "features a terrific performance from guest star Montalban, gives the franchise one of its greatest villains, and sets the stage for one of best science-fiction adventure movies ever made."[33]

The first adaptation of "Space Seed" was as a re-working into a short story by author James Blish as part of the novelization Star Trek 2. This book contained seven short stories, each based on an episode of The Original Series and was published in 1968. The adaptation of "Space Seed" appeared as the final story in the book.[34] The first home media release of "Space Seed" was on a single-episode VHS cassette in 1982 by Paramount Home Video.[35] It was one of the episodes of The Original Series published on Capacitance Electronic Disc, alongside "The Changeling", released on November 1, 1982.[36] A LaserDisc of the episode, alongside "Return of the Archons" was released in 1985.[37] Further releases of all episodes of the series were made on VHS and Betamax.[38][39] These releases reverted to a single episode tape as in the original 1982 version.[40]

The episode was released on DVD paired with "A Taste of Armageddon" as part of the general release of the series in 2000.[41] There were no additional extras added to that entire series of releases, except the DVD containing "Turnabout Intruder".[42][n 2] "Space Seed" was later released within a DVD box set of the first season in 2004;[43] all three seasons of The Original Series were released as full-season box sets that year.[42] The episode was included in the remastered season one release on DVD and Blu-ray in 2009. This release featured CGI remodels of Enterprise and other space scenes, including the Botany Bay.[44] The most recent release is as part of the Star Trek: Origins collection on Blu-ray, which was released in 2013.[45]

The events of "Space Seed" are followed up in the 1982 film Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan.[12]Harve Bennett was hired to produce a sequel to Star Trek: The Motion Picture having never seen the television series; he therefore watched every episode in preparation and latched onto Khan from "Space Seed" as the compelling villain he considered to be lacking from the first film.[46][47] In resuming the role of Khan, Montalbn worried that fans would see him only as Mr. Roarke from Fantasy Island but felt that he managed to recapture the character after re-watching "Space Seed".[48] The film set a record for the opening weekend gross of $14.3million, and went on to take $78.9 million domestically within the United States,[12][49] making it the sixth best-selling film of the year.[18]

The movie features errors in continuity when compared to "Space Seed". Because of re-casting, Khan's followers appear not to have aged from their appearance in the episode and Khan recognises Pavel Chekovthe character did not join Star Trek until season two, after this episode took place. This latter error was described in Deborah Cartmell and Imelda Whelehan's book Adaptations: From Text to Screen, Screen to Text as the "gaff notorious throughout Star Trek fandom".[50] An explanation was presented in the novelization of The Wrath of Khan, which stated that Chekov was working on the night shift at the time.[50]

A non-canon novelization by Greg Cox was later released in 2005 to fill in the timeframe between "Space Seed" and the film, titled To Reign in Hell: The Exile of Khan Noonien Singh. This book expanded on Khan's romance with McGivers, and the author wanted to "give her a spine" as he felt that she was not "the pride of Starfleet, and even less of a feminist role-model" in her appearance in "Space Seed".[51]

Events of both "Space Seed" and The Wrath of Khan were also directly referenced in 2013's Star Trek Into Darkness, in which Benedict Cumberbatch portrayed Khan.[52] The film took $70.1 million on the opening weekend, and $467.3 million internationally throughout the cinematic release.[53] As part of their line of licensed Star Trek comic books, IDW Publishing launched a five part mini-series titled Star Trek: Khan which described the early part of Khan's life and how the events in Star Trek Into Darkness diverged from those seen in "Space Seed".[54][55] One of the writers of the film, Roberto Orci, was the story consultant on the comic series. This series also explained how Khan changed physically in order to be represented by Cumberbatch in the film.[56] A retro-style film poster for "Space Seed" was created by Juan Ortiz in 2013, released around the same as Star Trek Into Darkness.[57]

The television series Star Trek: Enterprise makes several further references to the events first described in "Space Seed". In "Twilight", the survivors of the Xindi attack on Earth eventually resettle on Ceti AlphaV.[58] The development of Khan and his followers were said to have been through selective breeding in "Space Seed". American sociologist William Sims Bainbridge said that this method would have been unable to create genetic supermen in such a short space of time and that today the less implausible method of genetic engineering (directly changing the DNA code) would be used.[59] In fact, subsequent references to the creation of Khan and the other supermen, such as in the Star Trek: Deep Space Nine episode "Doctor Bashir, I Presume", substituted genetic engineering.[60]

The Eugenics Wars, first mentioned in "Space Seed", are stated in the Star Trek Chronology by Michael and Denise Okuda as taking place between 1992 and 1996. They considered it fortunate that these events did not come to pass in the real world, and noted that the development of the Botany Bay in 1996 as an instance of where "Star Trek's technological predictions have missed by a significant margin."[61] The war itself has been referenced elsewhere in the Star Trek franchise. The first mention of the wars following "Space Seed" was in the Star Trek: The Animated Series episode "The Infinite Vulcan", in which a cloned version of Dr. Stavos Keniclius, a scientist from that era, clones Spock.[62] Later, during the production of "Doctor Bashir, I Presume?", writer Ren Echevarria, seeking a secret past for Doctor Julian Bashir, noted that coverage of the issue of eugenics in Star Trek had been limited to Khan and his followers. Fellow writer Ronald D. Moore decided to link the background of Bashir to genetic engineering.[60] However, "Encounter at Farpoint" and Star Trek First Contact confused matters by saying WWIII (aka The Eugenics Wars) had occurred in the 2050s.[63] Furthermore, when Echevarria wrote that the Eugenics Wars took place 200 years before the Deep Space Nine episode "Doctor Bashir, I Presume?", he took the time interval directly from The Wrath of Khan, failing to factor in the additional century between the events of the The Original Series (and its associated films).[64]

Novelist Gary Cox first mentioned the events of the Eugenics Wars in his non-canon novel Assignment: Eternity, which followed up on the events of the episode "Assignment: Earth" and included the characters of Gary Seven and Roberta Lincoln.[65] In it, he mentioned that Seven and Lincoln were involved in overthrowing Khan during the Eugenics Wars. He had not intended to explore this any further, but he was prompted to do so by his editor at Pocket Books. He wrote a story, split into two books, about the specific events of the Eugenics Wars, entitled Star Trek: The Eugenics Wars: The Rise and Fall of Khan Noonien Singh. As the Eugeneics Wars were already meant to have taken place, he decided to describe them as being a massive conspiracy that was not discovered until generations had passed.[66] He also felt that this approach would make the books consistent with the Star Trek: Voyager episode "Future's End" in which the crewmembers travel in time to the same period of Earth's history as the Eugenics Wars, but find no such wars taking place.[66] A further version of the Eugenics Wars was presented in the Star Trek: Khan comic book mini-series.[54]

The Enterprise season four episodes "Borderland", "Cold Station 12" and "The Augments" showed a further group of genetic superpeople produced from embryos produced in the same era as Khan and his crew.[27][67][68] This was a deliberate link by the producers of Enterprise to both "Space Seed" and The Wrath of Khan, and was one of several plots during the fourth season of the show to include elements of Star Trek: The Original Series in the hope that this would boost ratings.[67][69]

More:
Space Seed - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

ALCOR MEMBERSHIP INFORMATION AND ENROLLMENT INSTRUCTIONS

For background information see also:

An Alcor member is a person who has full legal and financial arrangements in effect for cryopreservation with Alcor. (Associate membership is available for those who support Alcor's mission and/or who are considering making cryonics arrangements in the future.) Becoming an Alcor member is easy and surprisingly affordable, if you are in good health and eligible for life insurance, which will pay for your cryopreservation. (If you are not insurable, other financial arrangements can be made. Please ask us for details.)

Our fees are provided in Schedule A of our basic contract. The contract and other sign-up documents are available in the Library section of this website so you can read them in advance.

Note: If you think you may want cryonics, but haven't yet chosen a provider, you can help make it possible for others to sign you up for cryonics in an emergency situation by signing a Declaration of Intent. However, this document will not sign you up for cryopreservation.

To ask questions or request an information package, contact:

Diane Cremeens, Alcor Membership Department Coordinator

Email:

Phone: 1-877-GO-ALCOR (1-877-462-5267) extension 132

Outside of the United States, dial: +1 480 905 1906

Business hours are M-F 9-5 Mountain Standard Time (Arizona does not use Daylight Savings Time)

Fax: 1-480-922-9027

When youre ready to proceed, these are the steps that you will take.

1. Submit an application

For your convenience, you can complete and submit your application for membership right now as a PDF File. If it is more convenient you can print and mail it to us at the address on the form, or fax it to us at the fax number above. If you don't have all of the information that the form requires, fill in what you do know and submit it to Alcor. You may write "Pending" in the appropriate section if your funding arrangements have not yet been completed. What's most important is that you answer the questions in Section IX, entitled Decisions Concerning Your Cryopreservation, as this information is necessary to generate your membership documents.

2. Submit an application fee

There is an application fee of $90. The application fee for additional family members is $45 each. Any applicant who is still in the application process after three months from the initial application date will be charged $90 every three months for extended application fees until all membership requirements are satisfied.

3. Complete your Alcor Membership Documents

After we receive your application, we will send a set of legal documents that you must sign to confirm your understanding of cryonics, your personal preferences, and your desire for cryopreservation. Samples of these documents are in the online Alcor Library. You will need witnesses for these documents, and one of the documents must be notarized. This is for your protection. We want to be able to defend your decision against any possible legal challenge in the future, when you may not be able to speak for yourself.

4. Obtain Funding

For most people a life insurance policy is the simplest and least expensive option. If you are planning to fund your cryopreservation through other means, please contact us. Alcor also accepts cash prepayment for placement into a bank account or trust. Alcor can provide a template Revocable Cryopreservation Trust which can be used as is or customized to meet your needs. But for most people, life insurance works best.

There are two major requirements with life insurance policies:

First, the death benefit must be no less than our minimum requirement, which is currently $80,000 for neurocryopreservation members and $200,000 for whole body cryopreservation members. (If members residing in the continental U.S. and Canada prefer not to pay the $180 annual CMS fee, then the minimums are $100,000 for neurocryopreservation members and $220,000 for whole body members.) Members who choose the neurocryopreservation option will receive cryopreservation of the head and brain, in expectation that tissue regeneration will replace the body. (An additional $10,000 surcharge is applied for international applicants. There is no surcharge for residents of Canada).

Second, Alcor must be designated not only as the beneficiary of the life insurance policy, but also as its owner. This guarantees that the beneficiary cannot be changed without our knowledge, and we will be informed if the premium is unpaid. Alcor will provide a written guarantee that it will surrender its ownership status if you choose to abandon your cryonics arrangements or move to a different organization. You may use any insurance agent, but if you have a problem or you would like to deal with a cryonics insurance specialist, please see our list of insurance agents or contact our Director of Membership Services, listed above. Note that Alcor has no business arrangements with these agents and our list does not imply any endorsement by Alcor.

It is not necessary to have an insurance policy prior to entering the sign-up process. You can work on completing your membership paperwork while simultaneously arranging your funding. These typically take approximately one month each from start to finish, so doing them at the same time works best.

We look forward to hearing from you!

Read the original:
Alcor: Membership Info - How to Join

CryoCare Foundation was established in 1993 to provide state-of-the-art human cryopreservation with assistance from two separate, independent businesses: BioPreservation, which provided our remote standby, transport, perfusion, and cooldown capability, and CryoSpan, which managed the long- term maintenance of patients at liquid-nitrogen temperature.

Ultimately we hoped that growth in cryonics would encourage the formation of additional service providers. We envisaged a future in which our members would benefit as BioPreservation and CryoSpan found themselves in a free market, bidding against competitors.

Unfortunately, we overestimated the potential growth and profitability of cryonics. Also we underestimated the tendency of volunteers and enthusiasts to burn out, especially in a high-stress occupation such as remote standby work. BioPreservation opted not to renew its contract with us in 1999, and no longer provides any cryonics services. CryoSpan still exists, but its majority shareholder wants to wind down the company and transfer the patients elsewhere.

Consequently, CryoCare now finds itself without any service providers.

We received ample advance warning of this situation, and attempted to find other ways to maintain service. These attempts were unsuccessful. Consequently, in 1999 we notified our members that we could not continue to provide cryonics coverage.

While our original plans were overoptimistic, we still believe our business model is the best one for long-term stability, if cryonics ever reaches a point where it is large enough to sustain multiple competing service providers. At that time, our organizational structure and bylaws may be of some value. Until then, we encourage you to learn as much as possible about the history, theory, and practice of cryonics, and visit the web sites of other organizations that are still accepting new members at this time:

The directors and officers of CryoCare wish to express their deep appreciation to everyone who placed their trust in us, and assisted us, during the past seven years. At no time did any of our members suffer a health emergency in which we failed to respond; and our two human patients are still being cared for, with their maintenance costs fully covered for the indefinite future.

See more here:
CryoCare Foundation - Cryonics Services

Index - 1.General - 2.Technical - 3.Ethical - 4.Spiritual 5.Financial - 6.Membership - 7.Misinformed See also Scientists' Cryonics FAQ

Q: What is cryonics?

A: Cryonics (from Greek kryos meaning icy cold) is the low-temperature preservation of humans who can no longer be sustained by contemporary medicine, in the expectation they can be healed and resuscitated in the future using more advanced medical technologies. Cryopreservation of people is not reversible with current technology, and is today only practiced following legal death. The rationale for cryonics is that current medical and legal definitions of death are inaccurate and that cryopreserved patients who do not meet the more stringent information-theoretic definition of death retain sufficient biological/neurological structure to be restored to full physical and mental health using advanced future technologies. See About Cryonics.

| top|

Q: Has anyone ever been revived?

A: No adult human has ever been revived from temperatures far below freezing. Cryonics patients are cared for in the expectation that future technology, especially molecular nanotechnology, will be available to reverse damage associated with the cryonics process.

|top|

Q: Arent cryonics patients dead?

A: A person who can be resuscitated is not dead. Therefore if cryonics patients are preserved well enough that they might someday be resuscitated, then they arent dead: they are cryopreserved.

Before cryonics procedures can begin under present law, a patient must be legally dead. Legal death means that a qualified authority has determined that further care or resuscitation is not appropriate, usually after determining that heartbeat and breathing (or in some cases, brain activity during life support) have ceased. Legal death is a legal fiction, not to be confused with reality. A legally dead sailor who was lost at sea, yet finally returns home, is not actually dead. Given the gulf between todays medical technology and the expected capabilities of future medical technology, the gap between law and reality is likely to persist (The future of death. J Crit Care. 2014;29(6):1111-3). Under ideal conditions, cryonics procedures can begin moments after the heart stops beating. Blood circulation and breathing can be artificially restored, keeping cells of the brain and body alive and functioning during the early stages of cryopreservation. Cryonics may also be performed after longer periods of legal death while retaining the possibility of future repair and resuscitation as discussed below.

|top|

Q: How soon after the heart stops must cryonics begin?

A: Cryonics procedures should ideally begin within the first one or two minutes after the heart stops, and preferably within 15 minutes. Longer delays place a greater burden on future technology to reverse injury and restore the brain to a healthy state, and make it less likely that the correct original state can be determined. Exactly when such restoration is no longer feasible is a matter of some debate and could be many hours. The greatest impact of delay is that it prevents treatment by chemicals that reduce freezing injury. For further information, see the FAQ question Doesn't the brain die after 4 to 6 minutes without oxygen?, the article Cardiopulmonary Support in Cryonics, and the Cases without Cardiopulmonary Support section of Alcor Procedures.

The most effective way of reducing delays and getting the highest quality cryopreservation is to relocate to cooperative hospice care near Alcor (see the FAQ question What can I do to optimize my chances of being cryopreserved under good conditions?).

|top|

Q: Isn't the preservation process fatal?

A: Cold preservation (cryopreservation) is not yet reversible with present technology, but this says nothing about the abilities of future technology. What is "fatal" varies from place to place and time to time depending on available medical technology. Future medical capabilities should be able to heal and cure in cases that today would be considered hopeless, just as today's medicine would be viewed as miraculous in past centuries.

|top|

Q: When will patients be revived?

A: That depends on when they are cryopreserved, the specific details of how well they are cryopreserved, and how rapidly future medical technologies, particularly molecular nanotechnology, are developed. Cryonics technology is always improving; it is better now than it was in 2000, which was better than it was in 1990, which in turn was much better than the crude methods used on the first cryonics patients in the late 1960s. Eventually a time will come when human suspended animation will be perfected. In other words, it will be possible to routinely turn people "off" and "on" for medical time travel, space travel and other purposes. As progress continues, it will then become possible to recover people preserved at earlier times, with less perfect methods and greater degrees of injury.

Some think it will take centuries before patients can be revived, while others think the accelerating pace of technological change might so rapidly transform our world that decades would suffice. Alcor is planning for however long it might take.

|top|

Q: Who will revive the patients?

A: The short answer is "Alcor will revive them."

The third item in Alcor's mission statement is: "Eventually restore to health and reintegrate into society all patients in Alcor's care."

Reviving the patients is also required by Alcor's contracts with members: "When, in Alcor's best good faith judgement, it is determined that attempting revival is in the best interests of the Member in cryopreservation, Alcor shall attempt to revive and rehabilitate the Member."

Reviving the patients is also a duty of the Alcor Patient Care Trust: "At such time as Alcor deems that repair and revival of the Patients is feasible, the Trust shall expend whatever amounts of money are necessary to revive the Patients and reintroduce them to society, as long as on-going care of the Patients remaining in biostasis is not endangered. It is the intent of the Trust that such repair and revival proceed in such manner that ongoing Trust earnings reasonably can be predicted to provide for the eventual repair and revival of all Patients."

Financially, the Patient Care Trust should grow in real value over time compound interest should eventually produce sufficient assets to cover the costs of revival. At the same time, as technology progresses the cost of reviving patients should decrease over time. Eventually, the increasing funds available in the PCT should be sufficient to pay the costs of reviving and reintegrating patients into society.

Socially, Alcor is a community. Some members of this community are alive and healthy, while others have been cryopreserved. This community forms an interconnected network of friendships and close ties. At any point in time the healthy members of this network have friends, relatives and loved ones in cryopreservation and will seek to revive them. Once revived, those members will in turn have other friends in cryopreservation, and they will in turn seek to revive them.

The plan is not for "them" to revive us. The plan is that we, the Alcor community, will revive ourselves.

|top|

Q: What about aging and disease?

A: There is no point in prolonging life if the result will be illness and debilitation. People are now living longer, healthier lives than their grandparents, and their children will live longer still. Eventually, aging itself will be a treatable, reversible condition as medicine attains full control of the human body at the molecular level. By the time it becomes possible to revive cryonics patients, especially today's cryonics patients, biological aging as we know it today will not exist. In the 19th century, 30% of people living in Paris died of "consumption." Today almost no one in the industrialized world even knows what "consumption" is.

|top|

Q: If cryonics works for me, won't all my friends and relatives be dead?

A: This depends on many factors, including when you are cryopreserved, how long you spend in cryopreservation, how long it takes to develop life-extending technologies, and whether your friends or family are themselves interested in being cryopreserved. It cannot be reliably predicted how many decades (or generations) it might take to develop the technologies needed to substantially lengthen lifespans or to revive patients from cryopreservation. You can increase your chances of seeing your current friends and family in the future by interesting them in cryonics or by making friends within the cryonics community. At any rate, if cryonics works it will give you the greatest opportunity of all the ability to make new friends (including, perhaps, with your own descendants).

|top|

Q: What is the evidence?

A: The practice of cryonics is justified by three facts:

That is the argument for why cryonics should work, even though it is not reversible today.

It should also be realized based on point 3 that people in the early stages of what is considered death today will merely be in cardiac arrest to future physicians, and will be "coded" for resuscitation. Today's limit of 4 to 6 minutes for resuscitation without brain injury will likely expand to an hour or more in the future. That is why people are cryopreserved even if prompt cardiopulmonary support is not possible.

|top|

Q: Does cryonics have a reasonable chance of working?

A: Yes. When carried out under favorable conditions, both current evidence and current theory support the conclusion that cryonics has a reasonable chance of working. That said, not all cryopreservations are carried out under favorable conditions. The degree to which cryonics is successful for a particular patient will depend on how much of the patient's original memory and personality survives the cryopreservation and restoration process.

Assuming future medical capabilities are as effective as we expect, complete molecular repair and tissue regeneration should permit recovery of perfect health after any injury other than complete physical destruction. Unlike medicine today, which can leave a patient alive but suffering from chronic and incurable physical or neurological deficits, mature medical capabilities based on molecular repair should be able to cure almost all medical conditions with the notable exception of permanent memory loss. Even here, it is important to distinguish between (1) loss of memory caused by failure of the retrieval mechanisms (which could eventually be cured), and (2) loss of memory caused by obliteration of the memory trace itself (which even future medical technology would not be able to repair).

Survival of your memories and personality depend on the extent of survival of brain structures that store your memories and other identity-critical information. While cryonics under apparently ideal conditions results in good preservation of brain structure and information, cryonics under non-ideal conditions happens all too frequently and is more problematic. A major complication is the fact that today's legal and medical systems, along with the general public, do not regard cryonics patients as people worthy of protection. This could change in the future (particularly if we are successful in explaining the value and scientific merit of cryonics), but the quality of today's cryopreservations are adversely impacted more by social and legal factors than by technical ones.

It cannot be reliably known with present scientific knowledge how a given degree of preservation would translate to a given degree of memory retention after extensive repair, but sophisticated future recovery techniques using advanced technology might allow for memory recovery even after damage that today might make many think there was little room for hope [see Cryonics, Cryptography and Maximum Likelihood Estimation]. Our ability to judge when information is truly destroyed has been proven incorrect on more than one occasion: for example, the information loss apparently caused by paper shredders can and has been reversed, to the surprise and great dismay of those who did the shredding. Recovered information about memories could help guide the nanomedical repairs of the neuronal structures in the brain that encode those memories. Cryonics takes the most conservative approach by seeking to cryopreserve patients even when conditions are less than ideal and the risk of amnesia might be increased by some unknown extent.

For futher discussion of the problem of identity recovery after major brain repair, see the articles Cryonics, Cryptography, and Maximum Likelihood Estimation, Molecular Repair of the Brain, Neural Archaeology, and Prospects of a Cure for "Death".

To be successful, Alcor will have to keep you cryopreserved for as long as might be needed [see How will Alcor sustain itself for the duration of my cryopreservation?]. Some long-term risks are subject to mitigation strategies, such as earthquake risk (one of the reasons Alcor moved out of California). Other long-term risks, such as socio-economic disruption, are difficult to quantify.

Finally, when the time comes, Alcor will have to revive you. As explained elsewhere, this is a task to which the Alcor community is committed [see Who will revive the patients?].

|top|

Q: What do experts say?

A: The few technical articles in the scientific literature that directly address the question all conclude that cryonics, when carried out using today's methods under favorable conditions, should work.

This observation was first made by Merkle (Molecular Repair of the Brain, footnote 24), who said "A literature search on cryonics along with personal inquiries has not produced a single technical paper on the subject that claims that cryonics is infeasible or even unlikely. On the other hand, technical papers and analyses of cryonics that speak favorably of its eventual success have been published. It is unreasonable, given the extant literature, to conclude that cryonics is unlikely to work. Such unsupported negative claims require further analysis and careful critical evaluation before they can be taken seriously."

More recently, Crowley (An open letter to scientific critics of cryonics) said "Though many experts in cryogenics and other relevant fields are quoted in the media as condemning cryonics practice, none have written at greater length to explain their reasons. The closest thing to such a reason I can find is Michael Shermer's article 'Nano Nonsense and Cryonics,' but the reason he gave was one that he knew at the time of writing was contrary to scientific reality, and in response to my email asking where I could learn more he recommended three authors all of whom consider cryonics technically plausible." Shermer's editorial has been refuted by Merkle (Cryonics and Scientific American).

Cryobiologists are scientists who specialize in cold tolerance in nature and demonstrably reversible cold preservation of cells and tissues. Cryobiologists correctly point out that cryopreservation of whole humans is not demonstrably reversible. Some cryobiologists incorrectly claim that this means that cryonics is not founded on science. This claim is incorrect because cryonics does not assume that cryopreservation can be reversed using today's technology. The claim made by cryonics is that it is possible to preserve sufficient biological information today to permit reversal in the future with foreseeable technology. Evaluation of this proposition requires knowledge of cryopreservation methods used in cryonics, knowledge of neuroscience, and knowledge of future technologies proposed to reverse the process. Very few scientists have knowledge in all these areas. Cryobiologists, as a group, lack expertise in the future technologies that have been proposed to revive cryopreserved patients. Some individual cryobiologists have significant knowledge of these technologies. Notably, these individuals have much more favorable views of cryonics.

|top|

Q: How much does cryonics cost?

A: Most people pay for cryonics with life insurance, and since the actual cost of that depends on your age and health, to find out your specific cost you would need to shop for life insurance. Alcor offers two options: for whole body preservation you would need a minimum policy of $200,000, and for neuropreservation you would need a minimum policy of $80,000. (Neuropreservation is explained in the Technical Questions section.) Other funding options are available besides life insurance, including trusts, annuities, and prepaid cash or equivalent (for details see Funding Methods). Alcor members also pay annual dues, as explained in the Membership Questions section.

|top|

Q: How many people are cryopreserved at Alcor?

A: For the latest statistics on this, see our membership statistics page.

|top|

Q: How many members are currently signed up with Alcor?

A: For the latest statistics on this, see our membership statistics page.

|top|

Q: Why haven't more people signed up for cryonics?

A: People don't sign up for cryonics because it's not traditional, they're skeptical of anything they haven't seen work, it costs money, they're afraid of what their friends might think, they live in denial of their own death, they don't want to think about the subject, they procrastinate, they don't like life well enough to want more of it, or they are afraid of a future in which they may be alienated from friends and family and a familiar social environment.

Typical Alcor members (if any Alcor member could be called "typical") tend to be highly educated independent minded people who enjoy life and think cryonics has a reasonable chance of working. They pay for it with life insurance and think the future is likely to work out pretty well. They often have friends or relatives who are Alcor members. They expect Alcor to revive them using nanomedicine and expect to continue their lives with as much passion and joy as today only with much more amazing technology.

|top|

Q: Under what laws does Alcor operate?

A: Alcor is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization authorized to accept anatomical donations under the provisions of the Uniform Anatomical Gift Act (UAGA) and Arizona Anatomical Gift Act (AAGA) for research purposes. These are the same state laws that govern medical schools, neurological research banks, and other scientific uses of donated tissue. Several courts have also ruled that decedents or their relatives have the right to choose cryonics based on laws that empower people to choose the disposition of their remains. For further information, read The Legal Status of Cryonics Patients.

|top|

Q: Can I be cryopreserved before I legally die?

A: No. Current law does not allow freedom of choice in this matter. Under current law cryopreserved humans are legally dead. Actively making a person legally dead is a crime regardless of what that person's wishes may be. Alcor must wait for an independent authority to declare that illness or injury has caused the heart to stop, that further medical care is not appropriate, and that therefore legal death has occurred. Only after that determination is made can the cryopreservation procedures legally begin.

|top|

Q: Why does Alcor sometimes get involved in litigation?

A: Misunderstandings about cryonics can sometimes lead to disputes. Todays medical and legal practice usually pronounces a human dead when their heart stops beating. Alcor views its members as dead only after they meet the information-theoretic criterion of death, that is, only after their brain has been obliterated to the point where it is clear that inference of their memory and personality is in principle no longer possible, even by the most advanced medical technology that might be developed in future centuries. Alcor believes that cryopreservation can prevent this form of death. The purpose of cryonics is therefore to prevent dying people from dying, which is not how most people presently think about cryonics.

While Alcor members wish todays legal, social and medical organizations would accept cryonics as a legitimate medical treatment that any terminally ill patient could choose, this is not the case. The accommodation we have reached is that Alcor members have the legal right to be cryopreserved after they are declared legally dead, but not before. In practice this means we can be cryopreserved after our heart has stopped beating. While far from ideal, cessation of heartbeat usually occurs at a point in time well before information-theoretic death has occurred, meaning that cryopreservation after legal death, but before information-theoretic death, can be a way of saving our lives.

Unfortunately, sometimes traditional practices and perceptions of death can lead to interference with a patients right to be cryopreserved. Hospitals will sometimes refuse to cooperate with Alcor. Grieving sons, daughters, brothers and sisters who are already feeling great stress might not understand the decision to be cryopreserved made by parents or siblings. They might not even have heard about the decision until confronted with it by Alcor staff, which can add to the shock and stress. Relatives might fight among themselves about how to respond to the cryonics arrangements, and sometimes stand to inherit significant assets if they can successfully block cryopreservation.

When anyone for any reason tries to block the timely cryopreservation of an Alcor member, Alcor has only a few options. Obviously, the best option is to try to talk them down. This often works, and weve gotten pretty good at it. When it doesnt, we have to turn to lawyers and courts. Again, we try to negotiate a settlement, as this minimizes everyones risk and everyones costs. Weve gotten pretty good at this, too, and are often able to avoid court cases and their costs. But when these dont work, we have to pursue litigation. Sadly, weve gotten pretty good at this, as well. We must do so to fulfill our mission, to fulfill our contractual obligation to our members, and most importantly to save our members life. The member being cryopreserved is often a longtime friend, or an acquaintance, or friend of a friend. And every time, each one of us is thinking in the back of our minds: What will happen when its my turn? What will Alcor do if someone tries to block my cryopreservation?

Here is the original post:
Alcor: FAQ - Basic - Cryonics: Alcor Life Extension Foundation