> Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2008 09:00:03 +0000
> Subject: CryoNet #30822
> From: owner-cryonet@...
> To: cryonet@...
>
> CryoNet - Tue 17 Jun 2008
>
> #30822: Millions Being Spent in Cryonics [Melody Maxim]
>
> Rate This Digest: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=30822%2D30822
>
> Administrivia
>
> To subscribe to CryoNet, send email to:
> cryonet-request@...
> with the subject line (not message _body_):
> subscribe
> To unsubscribe, use the subject line:
> unsubscribe
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message #30822
> From: perfusion333@... (Melody Maxim)
> Subject: Millions Being Spent in Cryonics
> Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2008 15:18:38 +0000
>
> Recently, David Stodolsky responded to an inquiry, regarding information about
the millions being spent in cryonics. David's response suggested my (sorely
neglected) blog, as providing some information about the money being spent in
cryonics. If the person who asked the original question wants to see how I
believe a large portion of that money is being misappropriated, that would be
the place to go. (http://cryomedical.blogspot.com/)
>
> One way to see the actual dollar amount being donated, by Life Extension
Foundation, is to view their form 990's. You can find them here:
http://foundationcenter.org/findfunders/990finder/ Just fill in the name, and
select the state of Florida, and you can view the reports up through 2006.
>
> On page 18, of the 2006 PDF file, you can see that LEF made "Grants and
Allocations" in excess of $7.3M. Of this, a mere $85K went to Alcor, $1.6+M went
to 21CM, $770K went to CCR, $1.1+M went to Suspended Animation, $30K went to
Robert Freitas, and $1.2+M went to Stasis Foundation. (These are the
organizations that are primarily concerned with cryonics, another $2.4+M went to
BioMarker Pharmaceuticals.)
>
> I have no doubt that more than half of SA's $1.1M was spent on salaries and
associated costs of the employees, and consulting fees, most of it to a handful
of grossly underqualified, inexperienced people. The one medical professional
who worked at SA, in 2006, (that would be me), was not really welcomed by the
acting manager, who seemed mostly interested in building his own designs,
without exploring existing equipment. My viewpoints regarding making use of
existing medical procedures and equipment, with which I was familiar, were not
appreciated, to say the least. The opinions of the paramedics who were working
with SA, at the same time, were about as welcome as mine. People at SA, who had
no medical experience, whatsoever, and no knowledge of existing medical
equipment and procedures, seemed to think the paramedics should just blindly
follow orders of the relatively clueless SA staff, because "they work for us."
Any suggestions the paramedics made, in regard to existing equ
> ipment
> and procedures, fell on deaf ears.
>
> Judging by the way funds are appropriated at SA, I would guess the lion's
share of the $770K donated to CCR is for the cost of the employees, (I believe
that would be Steve Harris, his wife, his mother-in-law, and the mother-in-law's
significant other). The CCR website reveals nothing more than an info contact
link, and the public has no idea what goes on there, other than a seemingly
endless liquid ventilation project. We know "more than 100" dogs, (as of 2006),
have been subjected to painful surgery, over the course of many years, for the
sake of that project, but we have yet to see that technology brought to the
field. I recently posted some questions, regarding the animal experiments at
CCR, but I left out a very important one:
>
> How do CCR's benefactors (Faloon/Kent/LEF), think CCR's liquid ventilation dog
experiments compare to studies like this one, conducted by 56 physicians at
medical centers all around the world, and involving 311 human patients?
http://ajrccm.atsjournals.org/cgi/content/full/173/8/882 In the "Discussion"
section you will see:
>
> "The most important findings of this study are as follows: (1) PLV at both low
and high doses did not improve outcome compared with CMV, (2) a greater number
of serious adverse reactions were observed with PLV than with conventional
ventilation..."
> (PLV = Partial Liquid Ventilation, and CMV = Conventional Mechanical
Ventilation)
>
> Here is the quote from the January 2006 issue of LEF's magazine:
> "Current liquid ventilation lavage research at CCR is aimed at eliminating all
lung damage from dogs that undergo rapid cooling, and redesigning the components
of the system into a portable unit capable of being operated by paramedics in an
ambulance." http://www.lef.org/magazine/mag2006/jan2006_cover_lef_02.htm
>
> CCR is hardly likely to eliminate ALL lung damage associated with liquid
ventilation, when greater minds, with greater resources, have failed, over the
course of many decades of medical research. In my mind, for Kent and Faloon to
continue to believe people like Harris and Platt can achieve this goal is simply
naive, (a word I use, frequently, when discussing certain people involved in
cryonics). And, for them to keep funding people who can't accomplish the simple
goal of making cold lung lavage portable, in more than eight years' time, seems
BEYOND naive. (Actually, I believe Harris' first efforts in liquid ventilation,
were the projects he did with Mike Darwin, twelve years ago.) Forget about
"eliminating all lung damage," and focus on bringing this technology to the
field, in order to facilitate the rapid initiation of hypothermia. (And, quit
torturing dogs, without good reason.)
>
> When are the people funding cryonics "research" going to wake up and exercise
some common sense? It seems ridiculous to keep funding a research project that
pales in comparison to others. It also seems foolish to pay people like Platt
and Harris to prove they can cool faster than they could, in 2000, without any
evidence doing so would be of benefit. (I've repeatedly asked for evidence of
some rationale for their recent dog experiments, but there has yet to be a
response.) The same can certainly be said for funding the design and fabrication
of "unique" equipment when proven medical equipment can be applied. It's time to
stop doing the "we're so weird and wonderfully unique, we can't be constrained
by existing conventional medical technology" dance, and start building on that
which already exists. The beauty of cryonics is that IT IS an extension of
existing medical technology. It would behoove the powers that be to concentrate
on projecting a respectable, and responsible, im
> age.
>
> David Stodolsky also posted a response to someone's inquiry, regarding funding
designed to get physicians interested in cryonics. I agree with David this would
be futile, but I think there is an obvious answer. If people in cryonics want to
earn the respect, and interest, of medical professionals, they need to quit
behaving so irresponsibly, and quit running off the few medical professionals,
(such as myself), who DO become interested. No doubt I might have played a role
in convincing some of my peers that cryonics is a logical extension of
hypothermic procedures that are already successfully performed, (such as those
for repairs of the ascending aorta), but medical professionals don't want to
work in an environment where it is a constant battle to convince people, who
don't know anything about existing medical procedures and equipment, to even
consider what already exists. Throw in the "high school clique" atmosphere, with
people conspiring together to get others fired, or t
> o tend
> er their resignations, and a manager pulling childish stunts like writing
emails from the email addresses of his employees, and you have a situation most
medical professionals are unlikely to tolerate. People in cryonics will say
"It's the money," but that's not the case, at the LEF-funded facilities, where
the pastures are quite green, in comparison to salaries paid, in conventional
medicine, to paramedics, EMT's, critical care nurses, physician assistants and
perfusionists.
>
> Melody Maxim
>
> Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=30822
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> End of CryoNet Digest
> *********************
>

_________________________________________________________________
Divertiti con le nuove EMOTICON per Messenger!
http://intrattenimento.it.msn.com/emoticon

[Sono state eliminare la parti non di testo del messaggio]