http://www.alcor.org/cases.html A loooot of them include things going wrong, pretty clear signs that this is a novice operation with minimal experience, and so forth. Also notice that they don’t even HAVE case reports for half the patients admitted prior to ~2008.
It’s worth noting that pretty much all of these have a delay of at LEAST a day. There’s one example where they “cryopreserved” someone who had been buried for over a year, against the wishes of the family, because “that is what the member requested.” (It even includes notes that they don’t expect it to work, but the family is still $50K poorer!)
I’m not saying they’re horrible, but they really come off as enthusiastic amateurs, NOT professionals. Cryonics might work, but the modern approach is … shoddy at best, and really doesn’t strike me as matching the optimistic assumptions of people who advocate for it.
http://www.alcor.org/cases.html A loooot of them include things going wrong, pretty clear signs that this is a novice operation with minimal experience, and so forth. Also notice that they don’t even HAVE case reports for half the patients admitted prior to ~2008.
It’s worth noting that pretty much all of these have a delay of at LEAST a day. There’s one example where they “cryopreserved” someone who had been buried for over a year, against the wishes of the family, because “that is what the member requested.” (It even includes notes that they don’t expect it to work, but the family is still $50K poorer!)
I’m not saying they’re horrible, but they really come off as enthusiastic amateurs, NOT professionals. Cryonics might work, but the modern approach is … shoddy at best, and really doesn’t strike me as matching the optimistic assumptions of people who advocate for it.
Yikes. Yeah, that seems like a serious problem that needs more publicity in cryonics circles.