Saul Kent's "Warts" (Cryonics Case Reports)

Saul Kent's "Warts" (Cryonics Case Reports)

Joined: April 30th, 2006, 1:38 am

September 3rd, 2009, 3:38 pm #1

Quote
Like
Share

Joined: April 27th, 2004, 7:13 pm

September 3rd, 2009, 4:31 pm #2

Saul Kent had a stated mission of "consolodating" cryonics in his 1960's road trip. He has achieved that to some degree. Consolodation implies corporate control, total control, and no accountability. FD in an earlier post was accused of conspiracy thinking by CFmod-- which was funny-- but actually FD pointed to a useful document that implied Kent only releases info on a "need-to-know" basis. The OPPOSING philosophical view of information sharing revolves around the concept of a "stakeholder". Whatever the power and money holders in cryonics do reflects on all of us-- who are "stakeholders". This very forum, which I motivated Hinek to initiate (thinking that I could get many cryos to do forums)-- is an example of the way in which "stakeholders" can match power with "consolodators". That's my theory anyway.
Last edited by CF_Moderator on September 3rd, 2009, 6:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: October 11th, 2005, 9:18 pm

September 3rd, 2009, 6:19 pm #3

I really really hate the idea of encouraging your irrational tirades. But just to be fair, I do mostly agree with your point about content of case reports. I'll stop there. I'll probably regret this in the morning.
Quote
Like
Share

Melody Maxim
Melody Maxim

September 4th, 2009, 2:18 pm #4

Might there be a possibility that my tirades, (and I will agree with that term), have only seemed "irrational" to you, because you are not as familiar with femoral cannulations and perfusion, as I, nor with what has gone on, at SA?

Believe whatever you like, Jordan, but I think the quality of patient care, (especially that associated with remote procedures), that has been provided to cryonics patients, thus far, is a thousand miles behind where it should be, (far behind conventional hypothermic medicine), and I think that is mostly due to some very unethical behavior on the part of people who want to stay in positions of power and keep collecting their fat paychecks.
Quote
Share

Joined: October 11th, 2005, 9:18 pm

September 4th, 2009, 4:24 pm #5

Case reports need to be improved. A lot. Fine. And yes, of course it would be nice if we could afford medical professionals. You may think there are fat paychecks for all, but in many places, including here in Oregon, we have absolutely no budget at all for paying for perfusionists. Same goes for CI. Alcor and SA do indeed hire medical professionals, and they have problems with conflicting schedules even when they try to have backups available.

You saw some things at SA three years ago that you didn't like. But it's quite a stretch to generalize that to the current situation or to other cryonics organizations. Even if treatment is a thousand miles behind where it should be, there is no easy solution for getting from here to there. The owners of SA will pay for what they want and the rest of us should not have any say in that. It's not our company. It's ludicrous to call their spending choices unethical when it's not even your company.

Let's aay they decide to stop offering services at all, something which you would apparently support. No services are better than mediocre services? Seriously? So CI should just shut down because we can't provide "medical" services that are up to your standards?
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: April 30th, 2006, 1:38 am

September 4th, 2009, 5:28 pm #6

You seem to be twisting my message, to some degree. I have never referred to anyone's pay, in Oregon. Are you guys promoting yourselves as "cryonics professionals" performing medical procedures on the "cutting edge of technology," and charging a bundle for it? If so, I'll probably have to object. If you are just supporting local cryonicists by doing the best you can with what you have, and not falsely advertising the quality of your services, you probably won't hear anything about it, from me.

The salaries at Alcor and SA are quite generous, (some of them ridiculously excessive), for the quality of personnel, in my opinion. Alcor and SA have failed, miserably, at acquiring medical personnel who would not have "conflicting" schedules, and I believe that is due either to ignorance, or lack of trying.

Sparks: "You saw some things at SA three years ago that you didn't like. But it's quite a stretch to generalize that to the current situation or to other cryonics organizations."

Have I remarked on the organization, in Oregon? Everyone knows I have been supportive of efforts at CI. I think Alcor's deficits are evident, based on publicly available information, and you know what I think of SA.


Sparks: :"Even if treatment is a thousand miles behind where it should be, there is no easy solution for getting from here to there."

It is not as difficult as some would have you to believe, with a budget like SA's, or Alcor's. If they wanted to, they could provide quality services, with half as much as they are spending. (I'm sure the people they are paying have told them otherwise, and I wonder why they continue to believe in most of these people.)


Sparks: "The owners of SA will pay for what they want and the rest of us should not have any say in that. It's not our company. It's ludicrous to call their spending choices unethical when it's not even your company."

I don't have to own something to call it unethical. In fact, I doubt that ever happens, (a business owner calling himself "unethical"). When medical services are as misrepresented as they have been, at SA, it's unethical.


Sparks: "Let's aay they decide to stop offering services at all, something which you would apparently support. No services are better than mediocre services? Seriously? So CI should just shut down because we can't provide "medical" services that are up to your standards?"

I do believe no perfusion procedure at all, would be preferable to a bad one. When someone hooks a stroke patient up to a perfusion circuit and subjects them to excessively high pressures, they are almost certainly inflicting a lot of damage. When people allow a patient to remain at only mild-to-moderate hypothermic temperatures, while they struggle with a femoral cannulation, for many hours, they are inflicting damage.

As for CI, I believe their funeral director to be skilled in performing cannulations, and I don't believe them to be subjecting patients to excessively high perfusion pressures. I do believe they used to perfuse at pressures so low there may have been inadequate perfusion of the tissues, but they addressed that issue, when I pointed it out. I did have a little trouble with the "experimental nature," of untested additives being used in the Henderson case. I hope that does not happen again.
Last edited by melmax on September 4th, 2009, 5:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: July 1st, 2007, 8:16 am

September 4th, 2009, 6:32 pm #7

Case reports need to be improved. A lot. Fine. And yes, of course it would be nice if we could afford medical professionals. You may think there are fat paychecks for all, but in many places, including here in Oregon, we have absolutely no budget at all for paying for perfusionists. Same goes for CI. Alcor and SA do indeed hire medical professionals, and they have problems with conflicting schedules even when they try to have backups available.

You saw some things at SA three years ago that you didn't like. But it's quite a stretch to generalize that to the current situation or to other cryonics organizations. Even if treatment is a thousand miles behind where it should be, there is no easy solution for getting from here to there. The owners of SA will pay for what they want and the rest of us should not have any say in that. It's not our company. It's ludicrous to call their spending choices unethical when it's not even your company.

Let's aay they decide to stop offering services at all, something which you would apparently support. No services are better than mediocre services? Seriously? So CI should just shut down because we can't provide "medical" services that are up to your standards?
JORDAN: “The owners of SA will pay for what they want and the rest of us should not have any say in that. It's not our company. It's ludicrous to call their spending choices unethical when it's not even your company.”

RESPONSE: I have to disagree with this. There are many hospitals, clinics and dental labs that are privately owned, yet are subject to the public scrutiny, review and professional discipline. SA (and other providers) perform services that should be performed by licensed practitioners, thus they cannot perform as they please. (Hiding behind some gobbledygook of "anatomical gift" nonsense is another blatant dishonesty.)

I have an interest in quality cryo services, eventually even for myself. What I see is highly unsatisfactory. Services are largely provided and paid for as a hobby of a rich amateur. Then we have such disasters and the CI-81 case and more recently the “horrors” of the CI-95 case. In each instance we have apologists, who for whatever private reasons defend the undefendable, namely the poor performance and related damages to those “patients” by incompetent, unqualified and unlicensed providers of medical and embalming (stabilization) procedures. Then when someone poses an unpleasant, but important question, those apologists crawl out of woodwork, just to denigrate the questioner with insults and to urge stonewalling.

We have 30 years of poor service by incompetent people trying to play medical service providers. In the opinion of some medical professionals, most, perhaps even all cryopreserved people sustained very serious, perhaps even some irreparable damages. The apologists invariably answer “So what, future society will wake up the dead and will repair every damaged cell in their body. Such miracles will be absolutely free and will make all reanimated to be perfect. Well, with such day-dreams and fatalistic attitudes we are likely have 30 more years of the same.

One more point: The owners of SA are financing SA partly with taxpayers money. One more reason for public scrutiny.

Quote
Like
Share

Joined: May 17th, 2009, 5:13 pm

September 5th, 2009, 11:33 pm #8

You seem to be twisting my message, to some degree. I have never referred to anyone's pay, in Oregon. Are you guys promoting yourselves as "cryonics professionals" performing medical procedures on the "cutting edge of technology," and charging a bundle for it? If so, I'll probably have to object. If you are just supporting local cryonicists by doing the best you can with what you have, and not falsely advertising the quality of your services, you probably won't hear anything about it, from me.

The salaries at Alcor and SA are quite generous, (some of them ridiculously excessive), for the quality of personnel, in my opinion. Alcor and SA have failed, miserably, at acquiring medical personnel who would not have "conflicting" schedules, and I believe that is due either to ignorance, or lack of trying.

Sparks: "You saw some things at SA three years ago that you didn't like. But it's quite a stretch to generalize that to the current situation or to other cryonics organizations."

Have I remarked on the organization, in Oregon? Everyone knows I have been supportive of efforts at CI. I think Alcor's deficits are evident, based on publicly available information, and you know what I think of SA.


Sparks: :"Even if treatment is a thousand miles behind where it should be, there is no easy solution for getting from here to there."

It is not as difficult as some would have you to believe, with a budget like SA's, or Alcor's. If they wanted to, they could provide quality services, with half as much as they are spending. (I'm sure the people they are paying have told them otherwise, and I wonder why they continue to believe in most of these people.)


Sparks: "The owners of SA will pay for what they want and the rest of us should not have any say in that. It's not our company. It's ludicrous to call their spending choices unethical when it's not even your company."

I don't have to own something to call it unethical. In fact, I doubt that ever happens, (a business owner calling himself "unethical"). When medical services are as misrepresented as they have been, at SA, it's unethical.


Sparks: "Let's aay they decide to stop offering services at all, something which you would apparently support. No services are better than mediocre services? Seriously? So CI should just shut down because we can't provide "medical" services that are up to your standards?"

I do believe no perfusion procedure at all, would be preferable to a bad one. When someone hooks a stroke patient up to a perfusion circuit and subjects them to excessively high pressures, they are almost certainly inflicting a lot of damage. When people allow a patient to remain at only mild-to-moderate hypothermic temperatures, while they struggle with a femoral cannulation, for many hours, they are inflicting damage.

As for CI, I believe their funeral director to be skilled in performing cannulations, and I don't believe them to be subjecting patients to excessively high perfusion pressures. I do believe they used to perfuse at pressures so low there may have been inadequate perfusion of the tissues, but they addressed that issue, when I pointed it out. I did have a little trouble with the "experimental nature," of untested additives being used in the Henderson case. I hope that does not happen again.
I do believe no perfusion procedure at all, would be preferable to a bad one. When someone hooks a stroke patient up to a perfusion circuit and subjects them to excessively high pressures, they are almost certainly inflicting a lot of damage. When people allow a patient to remain at only mild-to-moderate hypothermic temperatures, while they struggle with a femoral cannulation, for many hours, they are inflicting damage.

What mechanism of damage are you talking about specifically? There is ischemia, and there is lack of vitrificant perfusion. If the blood vessels are damaged in such a way that the vitrificant cannot penetrate thoroughly, I can see how that would result in straight freezing and consequent damage. But no treatment at all would lead to the same amount or more straight-freezing, one would think.

Honestly I'm not too concerned about the damage to blood vessels alone since that is fixable long before vitrificant poisoning, cracking, and crystalization/dehydration damage is going to be... it is damage done as a side-effect that worries me. For example, if the blood vessels burst too violently and it damages all the dendrites, that could be bad... Does your neuroanatomy background suggest that this sort of direct damage is likely to be the case? I am not so sure; my impression is that one of the functions of glial cells is to act as a cushion and protect neurons and dendrites from damage.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: October 6th, 2004, 6:46 pm

September 6th, 2009, 12:11 am #9

you're 26... go live a life.

I saw this on a wall last year. It changed me:

Dance like no one is watching.

Sing like no one is listening.

Love like you've never been hurt...

Life is short.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: October 2nd, 2004, 8:27 pm

September 6th, 2009, 6:01 am #10

... I keep tabs on the cryonics mini-industry, as I will probably sign up sooner or later, hopefully not sooner.

Everyone should.

Better a slight chance at life via cryonic preservation, however low or high its quality, than a firm commitment to final death via burial or cremation.

I often wonder, though, TWr ... what is the obsessive attraction that burial or cremation has for people? To me either is bizarre beyond description.

Cheers,

FD
Quote
Like
Share