One (Hopefully) Last Comment on Uploading

When I first ventured into cryonics, (quite accidentally...I needed a job, SA had an advertisement with the word "perfusion" in it, and their facility just happened to be located near my home), I was acquainted with the notion of "uploading." The idea was presented to me as a method of exending one's life. Being mostly interested in the hypothermic medical techniques that apply to cryonics, and not accepting that one would ever be able to load one's OWN awareness into a machine, (or even another brain, or synthetic version of a brain), I didn't really pay much attention to uploading.

Later, it occurred to me that most of the uploaders were discussing making COPIES of themselves, and some of them thought the copies would actually be the same person as the original, something I found a little too abstract. If I was on my deathbed, and there were a dozen copies of me in the room, I would still be dying. My copies might think they were me, but they never would actually BE me, and once I took my last breath, the real me would still be dead.

These discussions took an even stranger turn, when some of the uploaders discussed existing in some sort of simulation, such as in digital form in a computer. To me, it seemed to be the ultimate in delusional thinking and narcissism. If I was able to upload my personality and memories into a machine, it would still NOT be "me," and the real me would still die at some point not too far in the future, relatively speaking.

I've rarely commented on uploading, until recently, when Cold Filter made the transformation from a cryonics forum, to an uploading forum, and the conversation got really ridiculous, with one CF member insisting a drawing of an hydrogen atom, on a piece of paper, is a REAL hydrogen atom. At that point, it became difficult for me to keep a straight face, and impossible to refrain from commenting.

Though I've read many articles and Internet posts on uploading, I never, NOT EVER, saw even one person describe it as a method to leave memories behind for loved ones...until yesterday. Every word I read, prior to that, seemed, to me, to be nothing more than narcissism. "Fundie" wrote how nice it would be to "...have some remnant copy of the brains of (his) grandparents and other departed loved ones, with which he could interact." I think that's a lovely sentiment, I truly do. I was blessed enough to know my grandparents, and even most of my great-grandparents, very well. In fact, three of my grandparents only recently died, (when I was 48 - 50), so even my youngest child knew them. One of my great-grandparents lived until I was 29, and my daughter, his great-great granddaughter, was six. I wasn't just acquainted with these people; I spent time with them; I knew and loved them. It was one of the great tragedies of my life, when my favorite grandparent, (my mother's mother), died at the age of 69, and I would do anything to have been able to interact with even a copy of her, these last 24 years.

With that said, a copy of her would not be her, any more than her diaries and photos, (things I regularly enjoy), are her. A copy, or simulation, of my grandmother would not be my grandmother, even if it was something I could hug. SHE, (my REAL grandmother), would not be feeling my love for her, and I would know that.

Off and on, for the past decade, or so, I've researched my family tree, and I have a lot of information about relatives who died long before I was born. While there are a few characters I would certainly like to meet, (maybe even if it was just a simulation), just how much time would I be willing to spend with the "dead relatives"? Other than the ones I actually grew up with, probably not much. Of my currently living relatives, I have my parents and step-parents, whom I love as parents. I have three children of my own, a beloved stepson and one grandson, so far. I have five half-siblings, an assortment of step-siblings, and nine nieces and nephews, (a number sure to increase, since some of my half-siblings are much younger than I). I have 11 living aunts and uncles, and 14 first cousins, all who have spouses and children of their own. I love these people and I don't have time to spend with most of them. There are currently 599 people in my family tree, on Ancestry.com. While it's fun to do the research, and to learn the history of some of these people, why would I drag out a simulation of a great-great grandparent I never even met, when I don't have enough time to spread out amongst my living relatives, all of whom I love very much. I probably wouldn't.

Though I found "Fundie's" argument for uploading his personality and memories touching, I think it strayed far from the mainstream uploaders. As I already stated, most uploaders never mention anyone other than themselves, or how they might enjoy living in some virtual world, where they could create simulations of their every desire coming true, ala Edgar Swank. Then, there's Mathew Sullivan, who now seems to want nothing more than a servant, who can anticipate his every need/desire.

I can't imagine that anyone past my grandchildren, will be interested in me, as they will have their own lives and a wealth of LIVING relatives. On a humorous note, I CAN imagine being a computer, sitting around on a desk, getting dusty. and whining about how the great-great-great-grandkids have no interest in me. ;)

Scarlett O'Hara Syndrome and Cryonics

A disproportionate number of cryonicists seem to be suffering from some sort of syndrome that results in them planning to be alive far into the future, without actually accomplishing anything of scientific merit that might provide for that. Like Scarlett O'Hara, they'd rather "think about that tomorrow." Actually, they'd much rather depend on SOMEONE ELSE to think about their problems, tomorrow. (Their "tomorrow" being decades, or hundreds of years, from now.) A significant percentage of these people spend their lives, sitting at their computers, expounding on abstract ideas and patting one another on the back, for accomplishing little more than having vivid imaginations. Interestingly, most of them claim to be atheists, and have dismissed religion as mythological, not realizing they are doling out more faith than most religious zealots.

Want to store 100,000 people in a geodesic dome, at cryogenic temperatures? Just imagine stuffing them in there, with little thought as to how each of them can be maintained, or retrieved without disturbing the others, or what type of cooling system could be used, or how machines could operate in such an extremely cold environment...let the scientists and engineers of tomorrow worry about that. Luke Parrish thinks one can stuff "ten bodies, or 100 heads," in each cubic meter. (This reminds me of stuffing people into phone booths and VW bugs...fun, but not very practical, especially if the goal is to keep all of them at a uniform temperature and to be able to extract one from the middle, without disturbing the others.)

Luke writes: "A cubic meter would hold around 100 heads or 10 bodies. A thousand cubic meters in a cubic shape is just 10x10x10 meters, with 600 square meters. So if the energy cost is $100/month per square meter, 100,000 neuro people could be stored in something costing $60,000/month to run. 60 cents, in other words." http://www.network54.com/Forum/291677/message/1256711414/Domes+rock%21

(I think Luke's cost analysis was overly simplistic, to say the least.)

Later, Luke writes about storing "millions of people," in his imaginary cryo-domes, because, according to him, "The fact is it is would be unselfish for everyone to choose cryonics because it would bring down the cost for everyone else. It would be less ecologically damaging because the energy usage per person would be reduced. Compared to burial or cremation, it could actually have a significantly reduced environmental impact." http://www.network54.com/Forum/291677/message/1254015159/Millions+of+patients

Oh pooh...Why worry about the environment?...I'm sure the nanobot scientists of the future will take care of that, too.

Want to send laymen with no medical education or experience, whatsoever, to perform advanced medical procedures known to be deadly, when performed improperly? Go ahead, send anyone off the street who volunteers to pretend to be a surgeon or a perfusionist, and let them turn someone's brain into scrambled eggs. Who cares? No need to worry about silly things like subjecting the subjects to inappropriate temperatures and intravascular pressures. The scientists of tomorrow are sure to be willing to spend their lives, (and money), trying to reverse the (most likely irreversible) damage. (Sarcasm, for anyone not familiar with my writing, or my opinions of the way cryonics procedures are carried out.)

I thought the goal of "uploading" was to be able to transcend the (mortal) human body, so that one could live longer, but I guess that hasn't really been the goal, for all cryonicists involved in this little "virtual adventure." It seems Mathew Sullivan simply wants a maid/secretary. Mathew writes the word "avatar" a lot, and mentions games like "Second Life," an Internet game, where one can engage in a fantasy life, selecting the avatar's looks, engaging in virtual shopping and work...heck, one's avatar can even fly! (Is it just me, or is "Second Life" something that seems like it should only be appealing to adolescents? I tried to look up the demographics, but there are conflicting reports and most of them seem more like marketing, than anything else.)

Robert Ettinger and Aschwin de Wolf have warned that associating the medical science aspect of cryonics, with these bizarre futuristic fantasies, may be damaging to the cryonics community. I don't think they realize the people engaged in these discussions want attention, more than success. How else could one explain the same handful of people consistently doling out crackpot ideas, (nearly all of which require a great deal of effort on the part of the scientists of the future), while actually doing nothing to prove those ideas? How many of these people are actually engaging in studying related sciences and/or technologies, (and I don't mean the self-directed, self-evaluated "studying" many cryonicists engage in), compared to the number who are just sitting at their computer monitors, every day, fantasizing about topics they barely understand? These people are not engaging in any sort of meaningful scientific endeavors; they're engaging in make-believe. Twenty years from now, most of them will probably still be sitting at their computers, imagining the scientists of the future are going to be carrying out their fantasies, and still doing NOTHING, in actuality. It's their own little version of "Second Life."

Maybe cryonicists should consider addressing problems that CAN be resolved, in the present, like delivering cryonics providers who can competently perform the surgical procedures the cryonics organizations are marketing. When Luke and his friends can back up their fantasies with theories, and proposed methods of implementation that more than a couple of dozen people will embrace, maybe I'll give their theories some thought. Until then, I'll probably just keep laughing.

Cold Filter Cryonics Forum Antics Get More Bizarre by the Day

This has been one of the funniest weeks on the Cold Filter forum, ever! First, a few people made fools out of themselves, trying to pretend I committed libel, in my post about Alcor membership dues, which clearly does not contain any libelous remarks. (See previous post.)

Now, we have Charles Platt, of all people, advising the CF moderator, on how to avoid being held responsible for charges of defamation. That's hilarious!!! As everyone might recall, Platt and I used to work together, at Suspended Animation. Sometime after that, during 2007, Platt was working with Steve Harris MD, (Alcor's Chief Medical Advisor), at Critical Care Research. At that time, Harris posted a lot really stupid blatant lies, about my work at SA, though he didn't really know me, and had never worked with me or even visited the SA building while I was working there. He posted these lies...yup, you guessed it...on the Cold Filter forum. It was obvious where the lies came from, so I threatened to sue everyone from Kent on down, if Platt did not publish some sort of retraction, and apologize. Platt hired an attorney and posted this, which clearly proves the stories Harris was publishing on the Cold Filter forum were false.

Now, we have Platt advising the Cold Filter moderator, on how to avoid being involved in a defamation suit??? Is it just me, or is that just really weird and funny? If anyone has ever brought the CF moderator to the brink of a defamation lawsuit, it was when Harris libeled me, with false information he, very obviously, got from Platt! After all that, Platt feels he is someone who should be advising the CF moderator on avoiding defamation charges? Seriously...that's BEYOND hilarious...it doesn't get much funnier than this!

Interesting Events on Cold Filter Cryonics Forum

There were some very interesting reactions to my recent post on the Cold Filter forum, regarding Alcor's membership dues. I pondered why anyone should pay membership dues, to Alcor, given that they are known to provide "last minute" services, to people who have never signed up for Alcor's services, much less paid membership dues. For example, they provided services to legendary baseball hero, Ted Williams, at the time of his death, at the request of his son, though Ted Williams had never filled out Alcor's paperwork, or paid membership dues. This is just one of many examples in which Alcor has provided services to people who have never paid membership dues. I know of at least one recent cryopreservation they performed, free of charge, and I suspect there are many others. It's my opinion that they do these cases for the sake of publicity, and I consider such cases to be a "slap in the face," to the dues-paying Alcor members, who have diligently filled out their paperwork, and have their insurance in place. (See my previous blog entry, on this topic.)

First, "FD" responded to my post, alluding to the inherent dangers of blogging. (He seems to think I'm too stupid, to have considered possible repercussions.) When I responded that he should let the people I write about make their own threats, he responded with an even more detailed expression of "concern," asking if I have media-publishing insurance, and pondering whether a judgment would be limited to the amount of my coverage, or if someone might get my insurance "PLUS all (my) life savings." (Either FD really IS threatening me, or he really DOES think I'm stupid.) He goes on to mention my blog index, as though I don't know it's there.

Then Mathew Sullivan, of Suspended Animation, seemed to be praying to the gods, (okay, so they're only "the powers that be," in an extremely small population), in a really weird post, for someone to take action against me, for what I wrote. If Mathew knew what I thought about that, maybe he wouldn't pray so hard.

Are Mathew and FD so arrogant, they believe no one else on the forum will realize they were not really giving me "friendly" advice? Surely, no one who has been reading my CF posts and my blog entries, for the last three-and-a-half years, thinks I am too stupid to realize I am responsible for my own words. I've even stated, on numerous occasions, (which I am sure FD and Mathew are aware of), that I am willing to stand behind my opinions, in any court in this land. How much more clear could I make it for them? Did either of them really think anyone was going to fall for that "we were just trying to help her with some friendly advice, and the moderator fussed at us, boo-hoo, wah, wah, wah" routine? If they thought I, or anyone else, would believe FD was genuinely concerned about my financial welfare, I'm going to have to question their intelligence.

The most interesting part of the discussion was when the moderator stepped in and indicated people had been threatening to sue him, if he did not "delete certain posts," which I can only assume to be mine, since I haven't threatened any such action against him, (at least, not recently). Now that we see Platt's post, we can only assume Mr. Platt was the person making threats against the moderator. Why are Platt, Sullivan and FD, making threats, in response to a post I made about Alcor? None of them work at Alcor, as far as I know, (though the anonymous FD might work there, I suppose), and none of them were mentioned in the post they are reacting, so strongly, to. Isn't Alcor capable of speaking for their own organization, and doesn't Alcor have plenty of attorneys, working on their behalf?

FD, Sullivan, Platt, et. al. are just trying to intimidate the CF moderator, and me, and it's just plain silly. Why should we take such warnings from those three individuals, seriously? One of them has a very long history of people accusing him of being less than honest, and one of them is anonymous. If Alcor, or anyone else, was going to sue the CF moderator, or me, I'm sure we would be receiving letters from attorneys, not "friendly advice," on Cold Filter.

I don't know about the CF moderator, but the minute I get any sort of legal notice, I am going to immediately "lawyer up," call the media, and file whatever counter-suits might be available to me. If any of my CF posts, or blog entries, (all of which I consider to be "free speech," and none which I consider to be legally "actionable"), are removed from the Internet, I will add "call the ACLU" to my list.

I'm wondering if people think my forum posts and blog entries have not been backed up and made ready to publish elsewhere, when they ask the CF moderator to remove them. Also, have they considered the possibility of others archiving my posts? I know, for a fact, someone was archiving my every published word, at least up until less than a year ago, and not at my request, (and it wasn't Johnson). I don't know, or care, if they are still doing so.

I believe there's a very long history, in cryonics, of people attempting to prevent the airing of "dirty laundry," with scare tactics, which are very transparent and tiresome. If someone wants to sue me, they should have their lawyer call my lawyer. Otherwise, these empty threats and attempts to quash my free speech, (from persons not even officially connected to the organization I have been criticizing), only encourage me to write more, (as should be obvious, at this point).

Steve Harris MD Drops Bombshell on Cold Filter Cryonics Forum

***Edited March 12, 2010, with note at the bottom.

On March 7, 2010, Steven B Harris MD, of Critical Care Research, a physician associated with both Alcor Life Extension Foundation and Suspended Animation, wrote the following, on the Cold Filter cryonics forum, in response to my questions about the drug propofol (Diprivan):

"We give 200 mg. There you are. If there are any signs of awareness later, such as eyelid movement or even shivering (not a sign of awareness but certainly a sign of CNS activity), another equal dose is held in reserve."
http://www.network54.com/Forum/291677/message/1268000067/Propofol+dose

In other words, they give an initial dose of 200mg propofol to people, at the time of "legal death." Then, in the event the person for whom they are providing cryonics services, (which include the application of CPR), shows signs of life, they give another 200mg dose of propofol, to render the person unconscious, so they can continue with their cryonics procedures. (The "we" in Harris' post refers to cryonics standby teams from Alcor Life Extension Foundation, in Scottsdale, Arizona, and Suspended Animation, in Boynton Beach, Florida. Suspended Animation also provides standby services for Cryonics Institute, in Michigan.)

If they see signs of life, administer more propofol, and continue with their procedures, (which would result in death), could they be accused of murder? Since Harris' statement indicates this has been planned in advance, would it be premeditated murder? Are Baldwin, Kingston, Battiato, Sullivan, Schroeder or Ruc, (the last publicly-named employees of Suspended Animation), willing to administer that "reserve" dose of propofol to a person showing signs of life? What about Alcor paramedic, Aaron Drake? Are the licensed, certified perfusionists who have been working with Suspended Animation aware of this policy? Are they willing to be a part of it? What about Ben Best, the president of Cryonics Institute, who has been an enthusiastic advocate of Suspended Animation's services? Does he, or anyone else at Cryonics Institute, endorse this plan?

For several years, now, I have been questioning certain cryonics activities, especially those that appear to be "ticking time bombs," with the potential to bring down the entire cryonics industry. I firmly believe that, considering the amount of money being invested by Life Extension Foundation, (which provides funding for Suspended Animation, Critical Care Research and 21st Century Medicine), and Alcor, (which also receives some funding from Life Extension Foundation), cryonics activities could be carried out in a much more ethical, professional manner. I believe there are ways to provide services superior to those currently being provided, and in a manner that would not constantly draw accusations of unethical and/or illegal behaviors. Is it the goal of the organizations involved to protect the cryonics industry, by properly addressing issues, such as this one? Or, do they really think quashing people like Larry Johnson, and me, would solve all their problems? I've got news for them...for every person who complains about them, publicly, there are dozens who are taking other avenues to register their complaints.

Harris: "If there are any signs of awareness later, such as eyelid movement or even shivering (not a sign of awareness but certainly a sign of CNS activity), another equal dose is held in reserve."

Maxim: Did Harris just write that, in the event a cryonics patient shows signs of life, the cryonics team is going to give them another dose of propofol? Shivering means the muscles are receiving signals from the hypothalamus and, as far as I know, legally dead people do not shiver. In fact, when people are subjected to hypothermia, they usually stop shivering even before they lose consciousness.

Note: On March 12, 2010, Steve Harris MD commented, further, on the use of propofol, in cryonics. He wrote:

"It is thus in cryonics that there is a theoretical possibility that a person in cardiac arrest who has been classed as legally dead might become aware of chest compression. We all hope this never happens, and part of the purpose of propofol is be sure that it does not."
http://www.network54.com/Forum/291677/message/1268372701/I+Can%27t+Believe+You+Missed+This

Anyone who "becomes aware" is alive, and it is illegal to perform cryonics procedures on people who are alive. Harris has already stated that they keep 200mg of propofol in "reserve," in case the person shows signs of awareness (life). This strongly implies they fully intend to inject a living person with the drug propofol, so they can continue their cryonics procedures, in the event someone responds to their CPR efforts and regains consciousness.

The protocols need to be revised and, no, (in a response to a question in Harris' post), I am not suggesting waiting 10-15 minutes. If that is the only alternative Harris and his peers can come up with, they aren't thinking very hard. The problem with the status quo in cryonics, is they are not open to change, especially if it involves admitting they have been wrong, or changing any of the protocols and/or equipment they have designed.

Responses to my Questions about Propofol

When I worked in heart surgery, every person in the room had a job to do. While I could tell you the basics of most of the drugs the anesthesia personnel were administering, I didn't always know the specifics about the dosing, just as they did not know the details about the job I was doing. In the short time I worked at SA, I never got around to fully exploring, much less questioning, the medications protocol. At the time, I had no reason to question the designers of the protocols, and I was spending more time than I should have had to spend, fighting for changes that were within my realm of expertise, and some that seemed like they should have been simple common sense.

After the Johnson book came out, people started to ask me about the use of certain drugs in cryonics, and after the Michael Jackson incident, the focus centered on propofol. People wanted to know why laymen had access to a drug most medical professionals working in hospitals aren't allowed access to. When I raised that issue on the Cold Filter cryonics forum, Mathew Sullivan responded that Suspended Animation (SA) was not carrying enough propofol to warrant anyone accusing them of hastening the deaths of patients. Not recalling what SA's dose was, and not having one of SA's handy-dandy laminated protocols available, (three years after my resignation from that company), I remembered the meds were listed in the CI-81 case report. When I read "20mg," and looked up the dosing for propofol, I thought, "Geeez...that's nothing more than a hand-waving gesture." (Note: Somewhere along the line, I inadvertently starting typing "25mg," rather than "20mg." Platt can go on about this all he wants, but it's really meaningless. What is important is that I was questioning an extremely small dose.)

When Harris explained the dose was 200mg, and Platt said the amount in the SA report was a typo, I wrote that even 200mg seemed like a meaningless dose. Platt responded to that, with some wisecrack about my expertise, (as if "expertise" has ever been important to someone who totally disregards an expert's advice on existing equipment and sends laymen to perform medical procedures). It doesn't take expertise to form the opinion that 200mg is not enough propofol to keep someone unconscious very long, with readily-available information, regarding propofol dosing. Propofol is super-fast acting, but the effects are very short-lived, and it moves rapidly from the central nervous system, into the peripheral tissues. I think anyone reading the following information would agree that 200mg of propofol doesn't seem like enough to do what Mathew, FD and Harris claimed it was doing, ("keeping people dead," while CPR was being administered).

"anesthesia induction (healthy adults less than 55 yo)
Dose: 2-2.5 mg/kg IV given as 40 mg q10sec until induction onset...
...anesthesia maintenance (healthy adults less than 55 yo)
Dose: 0.1-0.2 mg/kg/min IV; Alt: 25-50 mg IV prn"
https://online.epocrates.com/u/1011979/Diprivan/Adult+Dosing

Using the low end of this suggested dosing, for a 70kg (154lb) man, the dosing would be 140mg for induction, followed by 7mg per min (420mg per hour)."
.

Retracting My Acceptance of Steve Harris' Apology

Back in November 2009, Steve Harris MD, of Critical Care Research, in Rancho Cucamonga, CA, (primarily funded by Life Extension Foundation), issued an apology, to me, on the "Cold Filter" cryonics forum, for untrue remarks he posted in 2007. I accepted his apology, at the time, but after further thought, I think I made a mistake.

In his apology, Harris claimed to have thought he had already apologized. The truth is, when I asked him to apologize at the time he posted the untrue statements, he responded with, "So sue me, baby." I find it impossible to believe he went from that remark to thinking he had issued an apology. Harris also claimed to be interested in knowing the truth, regarding the false statements he had made about me, on the Internet. I publicly invited him to contact me, privately, so I could provide him with the details without rehashing the events, in public, again. Since he didn't follow up, I was left wondering if his apology was insincere, and issued only with the goal of cleaning up his tarnished public image. Furthermore, since the apology, I've had to ask myself if Steve Harris is someone I would want to be congenial with, and the unequivocal answer to that is "No."

In his book, "Mothermelters," former Riverside County Coroner's Investigator Alan Kunzman wrote that Steve Harris admitted to knowing a woman, whose death certificate he signed, had died in an industrial park, though the death certificate falsely indicated she died at a residence. Why would he do sign such a document, if he was aware of the inaccuracy?

Steve Harris, and members of his family, have financially benefitted for many years, for conducting dog experiments, which I find to be highly questionable. According to LEF's form 990's, in the years 2008 and 2007, alone, Critical Care Research received nearly two million dollars, ($1,824,500), in funding, from LEF. When I was working at Suspended Animation, I was told the four fulltime employees of CCR were Harris, his wife, his mother-in-law and her significant other. We don't know who the employees currently are, (though I think it's probably safe to assume nothing much has changed), or much about what goes on at CCR. Like their sister LEF-funded organization, Suspended Animation, they are quite secretive.

Steve Harris endorses physicians, such as himself, being allowed to write prescriptions for medications to be transported and administered by cryonics personnel, (including laymen, with no medical credentials, or experience), who would not be allowed to have access to, transport, or administer these medications, in a conventional medical setting. He gets paid for acting as a "consultant," for these inexperienced persons, but does not accept responsibility for their activities. When I remarked on him not advising a cryonics team to give a maintainence dose of a certain medication, he said he would have done so, "if they had asked." He knows, as well as I do, that those people did not know to ask about any of the medications they were administering.

When I criticized CCR's sister organization, Suspended Animation, of Boynton Beach, FL, (also funded by Life Extension Foundation), Steve Harris responded by posting numerous blatant lies about me, (someone he did not know), on the Internet. A responsible physician might have written, "I have concerns about Ms. Maxim's statements, because I've heard some disturbing stories about her," but Harris wrote, I did and didn't do certain things, while working at Suspended Animation, as fact, when he had no firsthand knowledge of what I did, or didn't do, at SA, and everything he wrote was a lie. Why would he do such a foolish thing? In order to fulfill his benefactor's "loyalty" requirement?

Recently, when I questioned cryonics organizations allowing laymen to have free access to, transport, and administer the drug propofol, Steve Harris, along with SA employee Mathew Sullivan, and "FD" an anonymous poster on the Cold Filter cryonics forum, argued that the 20mg* of propofol in question was necessary so Alcor and/or SA could administer CPR to patients who had just died, without causing them pain, or waking them up. Nonsense. Propofol has an extremely short duration of action, (minutes), and a conservative dosing of propofol, for a 70kg (154lb) man, for the purposes of maintaining unconsciousness would be 140mg for induction, followed by 7mg per min (420mg per hour). https://online.epocrates.com/u/1011979/Diprivan/Adult+Dosing

As for Harris' claim that cryonics organizations were "ahead" of conventional medicine, in recognizing that persons being subjected to CPR might experience pain, I'm going to remind him the people receiving cryonics services are supposed to be dead, and therefore, should not perceive pain. I'm also still waiting for him, or anyone else, to provide evidence of civil lawsuits that have resulted from patient awareness and pain, during the administration of CPR.

So, why is Steve Harris willing to endorse writing prescriptions for laymen to carry and administer 20mg* of propofol? I don't believe responsible physicians would endorse such activity. Was including propofol in cryonics medications protocol designed to make the public think the people carrying this, and other prescription medications, are medical professionals? Does it make them feel like they are medical professionals? Does it offer Steve Harris a greater degree of job security? Is it really a good idea for cryonics organization to be using this drug, in light of past accusations of hastening the deaths of patients?

In my opinion, Steve Harris MD is a physician who has acted irresponsibly, unprofessionally, and/or unethically, on at least several occasions. I seriously doubt his apology was sincere, and therefore, have no reason to accept it.

*Note: Steve Harris now claims, (on the Cold Filter cryonics forum), that the dose is 200mg, rather than the 20mg reported in at least one of Suspended Animation's case reports, but even 200mg is a rather insignificant dose. Propofol stays in the central nervous system (CNS) for only a matter of minutes, after which it rapidly moves into the peripheral tissues.

The Most Stupid Question I've Ever Seen

"Cryonics professional" Mathew Sullivan, of Suspended Animation, in Boynton Beach, Florida, has been asking me the same question, repeatedly, since November.

Mathew Sullivan: "Under the right conditions, would it be appropriate to place the patient into an icebath, establish an open airway for ventilation with an O2 concentration of choice, apply chest compressions at a rate of choice, and circulate appropriate medications, until the patient reaches a given temperature where surgery will commence? Granted, this will not apply to all cryonics cases."
http://www.network54.com/Forum/291677/message/1266721563/Now+that+Melody+Maxim+is+tooting+her+horn+about+her+medical+expertise+on+her+blog
I've answered this question, over and over, but Mathew doesn't understand my answer. Here's the answer I gave him, (copied and pasted, from the Cold Filter forum):

"Under the right conditions" for ANY procedures X, Y and Z, it would be appropriate to perform procedures X, Y and Z. "Under the right conditions" when a person presents to the emergency room with chest pain, it's appropriate to perform open heart surgery, but "under the right conditions" when a person presents to the emergency room with chest pain, it's appropriate to give them some Maalox and send them home.

There are many problems with Mathew's question...
What are the "right conditions"?
What is the "O2 concentration of choice"?
What is the "rate of choice" for chest compressions?
What are the "appropriate medications"?
What is the "given temperature"? (And, why would Mathew wait to reach a given temperature, to commence surgery, when the surgery is for the purpose of rapid cooling??!!!)

One problem with Mathew's question is, no one knows the definitive answers to most of my questions about his question, in regards to cryonics procedures. There are people who could make educated guesses, (for any given case), regarding some of the answers, but Mathew and his co-workers are not amongst these people. If Mathew's dentist knows the answers, (as Mathew claims he/she does), Kent should find that dentist and pay him/her at least a million dollars a year.

Providing specific answers, for any specific situation, (rather than this ridiculously absurd generic scenario), would be pointless. There will be endless variations, from case-to-case, requiring on site care providers to be able to assess each unique situation, and respond, appropriately. (Having Steve Harris on the phone, is a poor substitute.) As far as I know, no SA staff member is capable of making those calls, nor are they accomplished in gaining IV access, intubating patients, competently performing a femoral cannulation, or competently performing perfusion. In addition to those glaring deficits, all evidence indicates Mathew and his peers, at Suspended Animation, know very little about their own medications protocols. They are just blindly following orders, without question.

For the millionth time, I could teach almost anyone off the street to do the tasks the RUP's are capable of performing (placing the patient in the ice bath, performing chest compressions (whether manually, or with a device such as the Autopulse, or Thumper), and injecting meds into an existing IV), within two weeks time. I would pay such people about one-third what Mathew's salary was, when I left at SA, with bonuses for going on cases, and plenty of intelligent people would be damn happy with that. In other words, I think Baldwin could have three people for the price of any one of the RUP's, (including Mathew), and four for the price of each of a couple of them. However, since SA can afford a substantial payroll, and doesn't really need 20 people sitting behind their computer monitors 24/7, maybe they should hire a few people with the appropriate educations and backgrounds required to work on issues, like these, while they sit around waiting for cases, instead.

In my opinion, only a very uninformed person would sign up for SA's services, for a number of reasons, most of which have to do with proven incompetence, a history of deception, lack of staff members' qualifications for performing the services they are said to be offering, and simple logistics.
http://www.network54.com/Forum/291677/message/1259762082/Answering+Mathew%27s+Question

(Expletives deleted!)

Everyone on the Cold Filter forum, EXCEPT Mathew, understood my answer, and he's the one working in cryonics. Perhaps Mathew should return to his former profession.

Portrait of a "Cryonics Professional"

Mathew Sullivan, of Suspended Animation, in Boynton Beach, FL, seems to have recently made it his mission to discredit me. Back in December, he wrote:
"I would expect someone who claims to be a medical professional can do two things:
1) Demonstrate medical knowledge in some fashion
2) Act professionally
How can someone claim to be a medical professional and fall notably short of living up to 1 & 2 above?"
http://www.network54.com/Forum/291677/message/1260494638/Medical+Professional

Personally, I think the implied accusations of ignorance and unprofessional behavior applies to the majority of people being paid to work in cryonics, (including Mathew), but since he was referring to me...

As for Point 1:

I have demonstrated my medical knowledge by earning a BS in Allied Health Science and a Certificate in Perfusion Technology, at a prestigious college of medicine, passing the national perfusion certification boards, and during nine years working in heart surgery, where I was well respected by my peers and superiors. I have a stack of reference letters from cardiovascular surgeons, anesthesiologists, nurses, perfusionists and hospital administrators.

Mathew, who was a store clerk, before he was a "cryonics professional," has demonstrated his lack of medical knowledge, by parroting, (usually, without question), what has been taught to him, by people such as science fiction writers.

Recently, having not been satisfied with the rationale that supports cryonics organizations allowing laymen to have access to, transport, and administer propofol, (something I think is foolish and unnecesssary), I brought up the topic, again, on the Cold Filter forum. I threw out "propofol," and got back "peach pits" and "water," from Mathew.
http://www.network54.com/Forum/291677/message/1265910890/Apples%2C+peaches%2C+and+more%2C+as+a+controlled+substance

In addition to the very lame, "anything can be lethal, in sufficient quantity" argument, Mathew also put forth that my expressions of concern, in regard to laymen, (who are associated with two organizations that have been accused of numerous unethical, unprofessional and illegal activities), handling certain medications, were equivalent to calling in bomb threats.
http://www.network54.com/Forum/291677/message/1265992986/Reckless+disregard+for+others

See my response, here: http://www.network54.com/Forum/291677/message/1266024246/Too+Ridiculous+Not+to+Comment+On

During the discussion of propofol, Mathew foolishly advised readers of the Cold Filter forum that: "If by chance you don't know what sodium chloride for injection is, you can think of it as sterile water." Normal saline can safely be injected in large amounts, while the injection of sterile water, without the appropriate additives, will lead to hemolysis, (the destruction of red blood cells). To suggest that normal saline and sterile water are the same is ignorant and/or reckless. This is what happens when people, without the proper education and training, think they know more than they really do.

Mathew followed this up, with an even more bizarre statement: "In the real world, CPS turning into CPR equates to practicing medicine." http://www.network54.com/Forum/291677/message/1266290895/Living+cells+in+brains+and+metabolism

Mathew's remark was incorrect, in two very obvious ways: "In the real world," CPR (cardiopulmonary resuscitation) IS (a form of) CPS (cardiopulmonary support), and CPR does not equate to "practicing medicine." When I pointed out the obvious flaws in his logic, Mathew then tried to distract from his foolish mistakes, by asking if I think, "...if revival does occur, then we can invoke the Good Samaritan law without ANY legal consequence to the cryonics company involved or any of the individual team members..." http://www.network54.com/Forum/291677/message/1266379082/Re-+I+hate+to+tell+Mathew+this

This would be true, only if they were going to abandon their cryonics procedures if someone's heart started beating. The anonymous "FD," on the Cold Filter forum, claims the propofol will prevent this from happening.
http://www.network54.com/Forum/291677/message/1266530085/How+many+definitions+of+%26quot%3Bdead%26quot%3B+would+you+like

Is that accurate information? Or will the dose they are administering only render unconsciousness, and only for a short time?

Essentially, for nearly 40 years, people like Mathew have been taught to blindly follow protocols and use certain equipment, without question. Whenever I questioned protocols, or equipment, as an employee, at Suspended Animation, all that ensued was a lot of manipulations and subversions, designed to undermine my every suggestion. It wasn't until I resigned, and publicly complained, that SA started taking steps to change.

Blind followers like Mathew, are desirable employees, in cryonics, (for supervisors, who often don't know much more than they do), but detrimental to the progress of cryonics.

As for Point 2:

People who want to clean out a sewer have to be willing to sling a lot of crap.

Peach Pits and Propofol

Recently, having not been satisfied with the rationale that supports cryonics organizations allowing laymen to have access to, transport, and administer propofol, (something I think is foolish and unnecesssary), I brought up the topic, again, on the Cold Filter forum. I threw out "propofol," and got back "peach pits" and "water," from one of those "cryonics professionals," (Mathew Sullivan), at Suspended Animation, a cryonics care provider, in Boynton Beach, Florida. http://www.network54.com/Forum/291677/message/1265910890/Apples%2C+peaches%2C+and+more%2C+as+a+controlled+substance

In addition to the very lame, "anything can be lethal, in sufficient quantity" argument, Mathew also put forth that my expressions of concern, in regard to laymen, (who are associated with two organizations that have been accused of numerous unethical, unprofessional and illegal activities), handling certain medications, were equivalent to calling in bomb threats.
http://www.network54.com/Forum/291677/message/1265992986/Reckless+disregard+for+others
See my response, here: http://www.network54.com/Forum/291677/message/1266024246/Too+Ridiculous+Not+to+Comment+On)
During the discussion of propofol, Mathew foolishly advised readers of the Cold Filter forum that: "If by chance you don't know what sodium chloride for injection is, you can think of it as sterile water." Normal saline can safely be injected in large amounts, while the injection of sterile water, without the appropriate additives, will lead to hemolysis, (the destruction of red blood cells). To suggest that normal saline and sterile water are the same is ignorant and/or reckless. This is what happens when people, without the proper education and training, think they know more than they really do.

During the course of the discussion, Mathew made an even more bizarre statement: "In the real world, CPS turning into CPR equates to practicing medicine." http://www.network54.com/Forum/291677/message/1266290895/Living+cells+in+brains+and+metabolism...
Mathew's remark was incorrect, in two very obvious ways: "In the real world," CPR (cardiopulmonary resuscitation) IS (a form of) CPS (cardiopulmonary support), and CPR does not equate to "practicing medicine." When I pointed out the obvious flaws in his logic, Mathew then tried to distract from his foolish mistakes, by asking if I think, "...if revival does occur, then we can invoke the Good Samaritan law without ANY legal consequence to the cryonics company involved or any of the individual team members..." http://www.network54.com/Forum/291677/message/1266379082/Re-+I+hate+to+tell+Mathew+this...

This would be true, only if they were going to abandon their cryonics procedures if someone's heart started beating. The anonymous "FD," on the Cold Filter forum, claims the propofol will prevent this from happening.
http://www.network54.com/Forum/291677/message/1266530085/How+many+definitions+of+%26quot%3Bdead%26quot%3B+would+you+like-

Is that accurate information? Or will the dose they are administering only render unconsciousness, and only for a short time? It doesn't seem logical to claim that "not enough propofol to kill anyone," is enough to "keep someone dead."

Do the patient care providers, for companies such as Alcor and Suspended Animation, ever question the protocols and/or equipment? Most of them seem to be laymen, who don't know enough to question medications protocols, blindly following orders. They have a "one size fits all" meds protocol, and none of them appear to know to ask simple questions, such as, "Do any of the drugs require maintainence dosing?"

To top it all off, they have advisors, such as Steve Harris MD, publicly stating he didn't tell a cryonics team, comprised solely of laymen, to give maintainence doses of heparin, to CI-81, because "they didn't ask." Brilliant...send a bunch of laymen, who know nothing about medicine, and then don't tell them anything, unless they ask. It's the cryo-way.

I resigned from SA, in early 2007, and Aschwin de Wolf resigned, not long after that. I would say that, after Aschwin and I were gone, Mathew was probably the remaining staff member who was most knowledgeable about the medical procedures being used in cryonics. Sadly, Mathew's public statements reflect his lack of general knowledge about medicine, and his inability to engage in a rational discussion, regarding medical issues related to cryonics.

Cryonics protocols need to undergo drastic changes, but people like Mathew and most of his peers aren't even capable of having intelligent, well-informed discussions, on medically-related topics. The people who designed the protocols seem to feel as though their job was done, a long time ago. Was their goal to do what is best for each and every individual who wants to be cryopreserved, or was it to simply design a protocol that would impress the people paying for cryonics "research"?

Do the medical professionals the organizations are bringing onboard, (in response to harsh criticism, regarding laymen performing procedures), care enough about cryonics to question the protocols and equipment, or are most of them simply doing what they are told, in exchange for some very healthy consulting fees? It's been my experience that questioning the protocols and equipment is a good way to get run out of cryonics. As an SA staff member, who knew nothing about medicine, used to ask, in response to suggestions from qualified paramedics, "Why don't they just do what we tell them to do? We pay them, after all."

Cryonics Medications (Propofol)

Steve Harris MD, of Critical Care Research, (also Alcor's Chief Medical Advisor, and an advisor to Cryonics Institute), and Mathew Sullivan, of Suspended Animation, (both funded by Life Extension Foundation/LEF), have argued that Alcor and Suspended Animation's use of propofol is not only legal, but humane. Is that true, or is it more handwaving gestures from a group of mostly unqualified people who like playing doctor with dead people, while charging $60K-$150K for their foolishness?

Mathew recently remarked that Suspended Animation doesn't carry enough volume of propofol, (or any other drug), to kill someone. Mathew's arguments seem to imply his employer, Suspended Animation of Boynton Beach, FL, intends to perform cryonics procedures, even if the chest compressions and oxygen (CPR techniques) they are administering happen to make someone's heart start beating again. Some of Alcor and Suspended Animation's protocols clearing indicate propofol is used to "maintain unconsciousness," not to "maintain death." It's illegal to perform cryonics procedures on living people, and dead people don't need sedation.

In light of previous accusations of murder, against cryonics care providers, it seems foolish to have a bunch of laymen transporting and administering propofol, (even to the "legally dead"). If the 20mg dose Suspended Animation has in their case reports is all they carry with them, Mathew is correct in that it's very unlikely they could be, successfully, accused of using it to kill someone, since that amount is far less than the normal loading anesthetic loading dose.

Mathew has put forth a scenario, where a cryonics team can't get the proper releases to remove a "legally dead" client, from a conventional medical facility setting. He talks about extended periods (hours) of applying CPR techniques, (chest compressions and oxygen), to warm patients. If their client's heart was to start beating, they would, legally, be required to halt their procedures. Is 20mg of propofol enough to keep someone's heart from beating? For how long? When used for anesthesia, in conventional medicine, propofol is given as a loading dose, followed by a maintainence drip.

When I suggested laymen should not be transporting, or administering, propofol, Mathew and Cold Filter's anonymous "FD" blew their gaskets, ranting about how I want cryonics patients to suffer, or claiming I am out to make cryonics activities illegal. (If they don't clean up their act, I think someone else will eventually fulfill that last accusation.)
.

NY Court Documents

Recently, Mathew Sullivan of Suspended Animation, in Boynton Beach, Florida, and the anonymous "FD," who frequently participates on the "Cold Filter" cryonics forum, criticized me for not posting recent information regarding the Alcor vs. Johnson/Baldyga/Vanguard Press lawsuits. The truth is, I had not even read the documents, since they had yet to be posted on the Internet court site I monitor. During the course of three days, (February 2-4), four documents containing a total of 103 pages were posted. On February 6, before I was even aware of the documents, FD and Mathew took to pretending I was not commenting on them, because I didn't like the contents. People in cryonics are good at pretending.

One of the documents they are gloating over contains the testimony of Brian Wowk, which is incomplete, in that Johnson's attorneys have yet to cross-examine him. It appears they did not cross-examine him, because they were unaware he was going to testify that day, and they didn't even have an opportunity to depose him, beforehand. If they do get around to cross-examining him, in the future, as the judge suggested, there are many statements they should pay attention to. I find the documents, (like many legal documents), to be ridiculously long and boring, so I am not going to spend all day pouring over them, but there were a couple of things that caught my eye, as I was scrolling through them. Here is just one example:

Alcor's attorney: "Is it a true statement that Ted Williams' head was used for batting practice at the Alcor facility?

Dr. Wulk (sic): "No, that's absolutely false. I personally know the individual who was alleged to have done that, Hugh Hixson (sic). He's a scientist like myself who takes the field of cryonics very seriously. He is incapable of such an act, as am I."

Now, we all know the "batting practice" remark was a sensationalistic metaphor used to describe Hixon attempting to dislodge a tuna can that had been frozen to Mr. Williams' head. We all know Johnson's claim is that Hixon was attempting to dislodge the tuna can with a wrench, and accidentally struck Mr. Williams' head. We all know Johnson didn't really mean to give anyone the impression that the Alcor personnel was having a real "batting practice" with Mr. Williams' head. In fact, I believe it was the media, not Larry Johnson, who came up with the "batting practice" remark. I know it, and I can't help but believe Alcor and Dr. Wowk know it, since anyone of reasonable intelligence who has read the book and seen the interviews could figure it out. To make his testimony even more laughable, Dr. Wowk complained about Johnson presenting things "out of context," in a magazine article. Isn't that exactly what Alcor's attorneys and Dr. Wowk were doing, in a court of law, when they discussed the media's "batting practice" comments?

Dr. Wowk put forth that Johnson's book is "...400 pages of privacy violation, disparagement and defamation that presents false and misleading information in a manner constructed to be as harmful to Alcor as possible."

I'll have to disagree with that. A lot of those 400 pages contain the transcripts of tapes of Alcor's own staff members, (including the COO, the vice president, and an Alcor senior board member), describing Alcor allegedly engaging in unethical and illegal activities. Was that information false? I doubt it, but if it is, Dr. Wowk should take it up with his esteemed colleagues, such as Hixon, Platt and Hovey.

Are the case notes of the cryopreservation of Ted Williams a "privacy violation"? Probably, but let's put that in context. One of Alcor's own personnel, at the time, complained about many people, who had no reason for even being there, milling about, snapping their photos with Mr. Williams' body, (or maybe just the head). Maybe Dr. Wowk could ask former Alcor COO, Charles Platt, about his email to Larry Johnson, in which he (Platt) claims to have photos of the Ted Williams case stored in a safe deposit box.

If I were Johnson's attorney, I would definitely cross-examine Wowk. I would read the excerpt of the book, in which Johnson clearly indicates Hixon was attempting to dislodge the tuna can, and then I would ask Dr. Wowk if it was Mr. Johnson, or the media, who used the term "batting practice." I would also ask Dr. Wowk why his fellow scientist, Hugh Hixon, would make a statement that a drug was used "To kill (Alcor patients)," or make jokes about one of his co-workers expediting the death of a patient, so the Alcor team could "beat the traffic." Then I would play every tape Johnson has of Hixon, and ask Dr. Wowk if he could possibly explain why his upstanding colleague would make such remarks. I mean, if Hixon takes the "field of cryonics (so) very seriously," as Dr. Wowk claims, then the court should probably assume the statements he made about drugs being used to kill people during cryonics cases should be taken very seriously, should it not? I would make it clear, to the judge, that I thought Alcor's attorneys and witnesses were misrepresenting some of the contents of Johnson's book.

If I were to read the entire document, I could probably go on, all day, about how I think Alcor is being deceptive, (because that IS what I think). And, if I had a stake in Johnson's case, (as Mathew and FD seem to think I do), I would rush to my computer each morning to tear apart those documents line-by-line, and post them on my blog, knowing at least one of Johnson's attorneys reads my posts. Johnson's NY attorneys seem really sharp, but I'm not so sure about his Arizona attorneys, and it seems the NY judge may rule, based on what the Arizona courts rule. Regardless, that's Johnson's problem, not mine. TWrelated is right, not enough people really care about the outcome of the Johnson case, including me, since I expect a decision, in either direction, will be rather anti-climactic. While Johnson's sensationalistic book got the world's attention, for 15 minutes, I believe it was only a catalyst for a few other reactions that will forever change the face of cryonics, (hopefully, in a positive way).

Now, would FD and Mathew really like for me to keep reviewing the blasted legal documents, or would they be okay with them if I went back to ignoring most of them, as I have been doing, for many weeks, now? I really have better things to do.

Cold Filter Forum is Like SA

At Suspended Animation, (SA), we used to have these staff meetings, where we discussed the on-going projects. Whenever someone objected to any of the projects, the discussion went pretty much nowhere. (And, no, I wasn't the only person objecting to Platt's projects, cryonicists Sullivan and de Wolf frequently had the same objections.) I don't know why we ever bothered to complain, as it was pointless. All that resulted was a lot of cowardly subversion, with Platt recruiting some of his highly-paid RUP's to help him (sometimes secretly) continue the projects, and somehow convincing Kent they were being productive. It's pretty much the same situation, on this forum. I come here and make valid arguments against what SA is doing, and Platt takes impressionable people behind the scenes, in private emails, where no one can refute his claims, and I end up fighting a never-ending battle of one "Luke" at a time. That's in addition to the lies that were told about me, and the personal attacks that were made on me, (and, that's pretty much the same as what went on, at SA, too...Sullivan, de Wolf and I, (and even some of the RUP's, on occasion), were frequent targets of character assassinations).

I've tried to walk away from cryonics, several times. When I quit SA, I didn't have anything to say about them, (other than to my husband and a couple of cryo-friends), for more than four months. I had other dragons to slay, and I really just wanted to put the stupidity of it all (SA) behind me. But, every day I thought about it...about how they were lying about their capabilities, and about how I felt Platt had totally, and absolutely, resisted any change that might have resulted in him logging fewer $50 hours, even if it would have meant we would have been taking steps toward a better level of patient care, and I got more and more angry, until I could no longer ignore the situation.

At some point, I realized how harshly I had treated a couple of people at SA, who are just ordinary people making a lot of money doing what their bosses have told them to do, and I tried to walk away, again. Then, I realized, (all over again), that maintaining the salaries of a few unqualified people does not justify harming patients, not even "legally dead" ones. Some of the people at SA are quite intelligent and talented in other areas, but they don't have the backgrounds required to carry out the procedures SA is selling, and I don't think the cryonics industry should suffer, so that these people can maintain their lifestyles. SA needs experienced people who can gain IV access on patients with no blood pressure, perform femoral cannulations and competently perform perfusion. With the money they have at their disposal, there's no excuse for them to be sending unskilled patient care providers.

Platt, de Wolf and I, (who were all at SA, together), could have probably rocked the world of cryonics, if he hadn't seen Aschwin and me as "the enemy." I had a lot of knowledge about the procedures we were supposed to be doing, Aschwin's talents are obvious on his "Depressed Metabolism" blog, and in addition to his writing and computer-related skills, Platt had a lot of influence with Kent. Unfortunately, Platt didn't want anything to change, at SA, and he fought everything Aschwin and I tried to do, "tooth and nail." Apparently, he was afraid that, if his amateur design and fabrication projects dried up, he would be out of a good income, though I don't think that's true. Platt probably believed deWolf and I simply wanted to get rid of him, but that's not true, either, (at least it wasn't, in the beginning). We just wanted him to do things differently, in ways that didn't defy common sense.

If I had it to do all over again, I would ask Kent AND Faloon to come spend a week in a room with Platt, de Wolf and me, and I would bring along a lot of documentation, and maybe even a medical professional, or two. Unfortunately, we can't go back to that time, and I don't seem to be able to let it go, and I'm really getting tired of fighting this battle one "Luke" at a time, with Platt always behind the scenes. Regardless, I won't walk away, again. I may walk in a new direction, but I won't walk away.

Now, my apologies to the moderator...As I recall, I'm not supposed to mention the name "Platt," but that is what this situation with Luke is all about. It's a replay of the situation, at SA, with me standing in the middle of the room, publicly stating SA's projects are beyond misguided and the cryo-equivalent of medical malpractice, and Platt taking people behind the scenes and convincing them, one at a time, that all is good. There's a reason people like Kent, Baldwin, and Platt won't publicly respond to my accusations of incompetence, and that reason should be quite obvious, to everyone.

Must We Speculate on SA's Recent Case?

(Reprint of my recent post, on Cold Filter, with minor edits.)

It's been just over a month, since the cryopreservation of Curtis Henderson (CI-95), and Suspended Animation has yet to publish their case report. (In conventional medicine, case reports are typically dictated immediately after the procedure, and transcribed soon thereafter; not written a month, or more, later.) Factual material regarding a medical procedure shouldn't take months, weeks, or even days, to produce.

The information in italics, below, is from Mr. Henderson's CI case report http://www.cryonics.org/reports/CI95.html):


"...Curtis' heart stopped at 4:15am on the morning of Thursday, June 25th, 2009.

Curtis was given prompt pronouncement of death and placed in the ice bath with the autopulse cardiopulmonary support. But the standby team had to wait an hour for the funeral director before they could leave the hospital. It took another hour for the team to reach the funeral home, driving slowly in the van while the team gave Curtis cardiopulmonary support."

Cardiopulmonary support with the Autopulse? Or, did it fail, again? (I'm wondering why they had to drive "slowly," if the Autopulse was being used.)


"The Suspended Animation team consisted of Suspended Animation staff plus a professional perfusionist."

As I've already stated, (in a previous post), I think it was GREAT that SA had a qualified perfusionist show up for a recent case. However, as far as we know, they still don't guarantee one will show up for every case. (In fact, I think Mathew Sullivan has indicated that SA offers no such guarantee.)

Did Mr. Henderson pay $60K for a professional perfusionist, (who probably wasn't guaranteed to show up but, thankfully, did), a research scientist with surgical experience, (who apparently didn't feel comfortable performing a femoral cannulation), and a couple of other care providers with nothing more than EMT-Basic training followed by little-to-no experience with human patients, and a funeral director Mr. Henderson would have had, anyway?


"For the first two-and-a-half days the team also included a surgeon, but the surgeon could not remain on the standby. Another surgeon was to join the team later in the day Thursday, but that was of no help early Thursday morning when the team needed to do surgery."

After seven years, and probably 10 MILLION dollars, (or more), SA still can't provide someone capable of performing a femoral cannulation, for every case??? The perfusion procedure is the "backbone" of the services SA is said to be providing. If you don't have someone capable of performing a good cannulation, and someone capable of safely performing the perfusion, you have virtually nothing. Also, let's not forget the importance of having someone capable of gaining IV access on a patient with no blood pressure. SA was probably lucky, in that Mr. Henderson was in a hospital, so we can assume he had at least one IV already in place.


"Team-leader Catherine Baldwin had years of experience doing surgery on laboratory animals, but not humans. Catherine solicited the assistance of a funeral director to isolate the blood vessels. "

Does this mean Ms. Baldwin thinks someone who has "had years of experience doing surgery on laboratory animals" is less qualified than a funeral director, for performing a femoral cannulation? What good are Ms. Baldwin's "years of experience doing surgery," if she won't perform the primary surgical procedure associated with SA's services? Isolating the femoral vessels is a relatively easy surgical task, and I believe funeral directors aren't really known for their finesse, as they typically don't have to be concerned with inflicting additional internal damage on their clients.

What were the qualifications of the "surgeon" who showed up but couldn't stick around for the procedure, and the "surgeon" who couldn't make it in time? Were they actual surgeons who have performed femoral cannulations on humans? Or, has most of their experience been with animals, just as Ms. Baldwin's?


"Catherine and the New York funeral director arrived at the funeral home of CI's funeral director Jim Walsh at about 3:30am on Friday morning. Mr. Walsh opened Curtis' chest with a median sternotomy. He could have perfused through the ascending aorta, but insofar as there was already a cannula in place in the femoral artery that had been placed by SA. Catherine told Jim that the cannula in the femoral artery extended all the way up to near the heart. Jim decided to use the existing cannula and take drainage from the jugular. Part of his rationale was concern about problems from pacemaker wires close to the heart. He clamped the axillary arteries as well as the descending aorta (thinking that the cannula in the descending aorta was not being constricted). In retrospect, the main advantage in opening the chest was the ability to clamp the descending aorta, because the decision to use the femoral cannula was only made after the chest had been opened."

There's no "rational rationale" in performing additional cannulations, if the femoral cannulae are in place, and a proper washout has been performed, without complications related to the cannulation. Plenty of heart surgeries are performed, via femoral cannulation. I think I see a lot of evidence as to why cryonics organizations are going to have to either educate a select group of funeral directors, or find "surgeons" who feel confident in performing cannulations.

Was either of the SA vehicles that get so much publicity, and are used for training sessions, used?

Finally, is the SA case report being written by team members who were actually present for the procedure, or by non-medical professionals who weren't even there? If the case is the latter, I will feel compelled to assume some creative writing is taking place, especially given the time-frame in producing the reports.

Michael "Mike Darwin" Federowicz

Below are my responses to some of Michael ("Mike Darwin") Federowicz' postings on the Cold Filter forum:

http://www.network54.com/Forum/291677/message/1234244535/On+Maxim%27s+Distotions+%26amp%3B+Cryonics+Expertise

Federowicz: Her position also denies the reality that cryonics once had both a professional perfusionist and a licensed hemodialysis technician (with extensive CPB experience) setting the standards and determining the technology used on cryopatients and that both these men used the medical model and, wherever possible, well vetted conventional medical equipment in delivering cryopatient care.

My position is that both these people have publicly claimed to have been "board-eligible perfusionists," when I don't believe either one ever was, and both of them seem to have engaged in other unethical behaviors and perhaps a few cryonics "cover-ups." As far as I know, neither Leaf or Federowicz ever attended an accredited school of perfusion and performed the 100 (live human) clinical cases required to sit for the boards. In "Mothermelters," Alan Kunzman claims Jerry Leaf, (the "professional perfusionist"), was never licensed to work with humans, (whether alive, or dead). Since I think it is unlikely someone would mistakenly think they have met the requirements to sit for the perfusion board exams, (and even more unlikely someone who has met the requirements would neglect to sit for the exams), I have to believe they lied, intentionally. This makes it impossible for me to put much faith in any information they have provided about their activities in cryonics, (or information on ANY topic, for that matter).

In addition, Federwicz publicly claims to have perfused "approximately 1,000 dogs." There is no evidence that many dogs have been subjected to cryonics experiments. My guess is, the number of dogs perfused in cryonics experiments is nowhere near that high. If Federowicz wants to maintain he has done 1,000 dog experiments, I'm sure PETA and other agencies would be interested in seeing the paperwork.

Federowicz: Perhaps most perniciously, her position denies the remarkable and successful research accomplishments attained during this period by these two men, and others working with them, using dogs in a survival model of CPB.

Where is the evidence of these "remarkable and successful research accomplishments"? Thus far, other than the write-ups published in "Cryonics," (Federowicz was an editor of that publication), I have only been able to locate ONE published paper on the cryonics dog experiments. If there have been 1,000 experiments, as Federowicz claims, they must not have been as "remarkable," or "successful," as he thinks.

Federowicz: In 1977 perfusionist and biomedical researcher at UCLA, Jerry D. Leaf, became involved in cryonics and began two organizations with the express mission to develop, validate, and standardize evidence-based procedures for every aspect of cryonics suspension using a medical model.

Former deputy coroner of Riverside, California, Alan Kunzman, publicly accused Jerry Leaf of ordering hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars worth of medical equipment, on UCLA's tab, and having it delivered to Alcor. ***In the interest of fairness, I have revised this paragraph.*** Someone I trust has informed me that Alcor did purchase these items from UCLA surplus equipment, but they couldn't produce the receipts at the time because they had been confiscated by Kunzman's office. My informant states it is typical for the metal ID tags to remain on the equipment when it is sold, and I believe that is probably true.

Leaf was also involved in the cryopreservation of Dora Kent, whose death was somewhat suspicious. Allegedly, Saul Kent and Federowicz, (wearing white lab coats and driving a used ambulance with the ambulance company's name still on the side), picked Dora up and drove her to the Alcor facility, where she conveniently died and was cryopreserved, two days later. Leaf and Darwin, foolishly, declared her dead without a physician present and proceeded with a cryopreservation. (None of them had enough common sense to realize people were going to find these activities suspicious?)

According to Kunzman, Steve Harris MD admitted to signing not one, but three, death certificates. He said Alcor wrote up the death certificates and he "just signed them." Though Harris had already admitted to not being at Alcor, at the time of Dora's death, (and this was allegedly confirmed in Mike Perry's journal), Leaf later called the Coroner's office and provided them with a list of names of people who were, allegedly, present for Dora's death, and included Harris.

Federowicz: In short, Ms. Maxim is attacking the very people she says she feels are essential in cryonics while at the same time effectively denying that they once existed *and that a high standard of care (the same as a patient undergoing CPB in hospital at that time) was once the reality, at least in cryonics as practiced by Alcor at that time.*

I am "attacking the very people I feel are essential in cryonics"??? I am NOT. I don't believe people like Federwicz and Leaf, (people who seem to have thought they were above the law, and were willing to engage in some rather questionable activities), are "essential in cryonics," or that a "high standard of care (the same as a patient undergoing CPB in hospital at that time)," has ever been a "reality," in cryonics.

Federowicz: ...of understanding of how cryonics differs from conventional perfusion, and lack of understanding of the fairly large body of knowledge that has been accumulated which is unique to cryonics cases.

I'm quite familiar with the "large body of" speculation that has been accumulated, in regard to cryonics cases, I see more propaganda and narcissistic pride in unproven "accomplishments" than I see actual achievement.

In regard to my comments about flow probes:
Federowicz: Had Ms. Maxim established a dialogue with me this information would have undoubtedly been quickly passed along.

First of all, I do not respect Federowicz enough to seek out his advice, or opinions. Secondly, I didn't need Mike to tell me how electro-magnetic flow meters work. I wasn't sure of the exact composition of CI's solutions, but I was well aware the flow meters would very likely not function properly with those solutions. Regardless, I wanted to demonstrate the pump to Ben, because I felt it would add a margin of safety, for CI's patients. At the time, I believed it was more important for CI to avoid pumping air, and to learn to measure a more accurate patient pressure.

Federowicz: Why is knowing flow so important?...The history of scientific, evidence-based medicine is a testimony to the criticality of vigorously collecting data which is consistently and ACCURATELY collected. That means precision in quantification. Ms. Maxim seems not to grasp this.

Federwicz is in no position to state that I am not capable of understanding the importance of perfusion-related issues, even in cryonics. HE seems not to grasp the fact that he is calling for excellence from people who have little-to-no knowledge about basic perfusion. Does he really expect laymen, with little opportunity to develop clinical skills, to perform perfusion procedures with precision? Get them to stop pumping air to patients, and subjecting patients to inappropriate pressures, and THEN worry about accuracy.

Federowicz: 1) Knowing flows with precision and accuracy (indeed knowing them at all!) was critically important. It is absolutely essential in cryoprotective perfusion because flow rate is the primary perfusion parameter that determines cryoprotective agent equilibration in the patient. Flow is also the primary determinant of cooling rate (along with heat exchanger efficiency and the temperature of the wall water) during in-field CPB of cryopatients. Knowing when the patient will be cold enough to come off the pump is often really important since it can mean catching or missing a commercial flight. Roller pumps give a very consistent flow regardless of temperature, pressure, viscosity or perfusate composition. RPM can be converted directly into flow.

This may seem impressive to laymen, but it's absurd, to me. Cryoprotective agent (CPA) uptake is going to rely on a number of factors, and vary from patient-to-patient. You need a way to accurately measure the actual concentration of the CPA, not try to calculate it by flow rate, which will need to be adjusted, depending on patient pressures. As for the washout procedure, the flow rate, (and, therefore, the cooling rate), is going to be largely dependent on the pressure. It doesn't matter what time the next flight is. Yes, "roller pumps give a very consistent flow regardless of temperature, pressure, viscosity or perfusate composition," (even if the perfusate is AIR)...herein lie the fundamental problems with amateurs using these pumps.

2) It is possible to design TBW systems so that no macro air can be perfused using roller pumps. This was done with the ATP.

Nothing could be further from the truth. I believe the "ATP" at SA, when I first went to work there, was virtually identical to the circuit Federowicz designed, for Alcor, and there was NOTHING on the "ATP" that would have prevented the pumping of macro air.

3) The notion that centrifugal pumps cannot cause physiologically devastating over-pressure injury is incorrect. While centrifugals cannot generate an infinite head of pressure under occluded conditions as can roller pumps, the static pressure of most medical centrifugals under no-flow (occluded arterial or venous line) conditions varies from ~500 to well over 700 mm Hg. Such pressures will NOT rupture the extracorporeal circuit (i.e., explode oxygenators, filters, or blow apart circuit connections) but they can cause tremendous damage to patients.

More distraction. The reality is that, unlike a roller pump, a centrifugal pump will decrease flow in response to increased outlet pressure. If I am perfusing a patient at 60mmHg at 2,000RPM and 3L of flow per minute, and the pressure increases, the flow is going to go down without any adjustment of RPM's and a "low flow" alarm is going to go off, well before the pressures Federwicz mentions are ever reached. A person would have to be TRYING to reach those pressures and ignoring the pump alarms, when using a centrifugal pump. Also, if the people in cryonics wouldn't slide the tubing over every available barb on the connectors, and double-band the connections, I believe the circuit would blow apart, before those pressures were reached.

Federowicz: 4) No cryonics patient, to my knowledge, has ever been air embolized during in-field TBW due to a roller pump or due to pumping the venous reservoir dry.

How many in-field total body washouts has Federowicz been present for? I have a very hard time believing no cryonics patients have been subjected to air embolization in the field, where the conditions are certainly not as good as those at the cryonics organizations, where we know air-embolization of patients is a blunder that occurs with an alarming frequency.

Federowicz: 7) Centrifugal pumps are not acceptable for CPA perfusion and personnel MUST learn how to reliably and safely use roller or other occlusive positive displacement pumps.

I'm not sure this is true. Ben Best and I ran a centrifugal pump with CI's most viscous solution, at temperatures near zero C, without any problem other than those associated with the flow probe, and there are alternatives to using that flow probe to measure flow.

Federowicz:The solution is to have *only properly trained/skilled personnel perform TBW*. Clinical perfusionists are the ideal (with additional training)...

Agreed, but "properly trained" personnel shouldn't be trained by people of questionable capabilities. The "additional training," in regard to the washout procedure, would be minimal and could be carried out using a bucket of water as a "patient." I'm sure the SA staff feels good about themselves for "playing doctor" with a pig, but it was unnecessary.

Federowicz:...but the fact is that any intelligent, motivated person with the right temperament and reflexes can be trained to operate an open circuit TBW system (with the proper safeguards) with a high degree of safety.

Nonsense. There's not enough proper training available, in cryonics, where there is little opportunity for clinical experience.

Federowicz: There was a time when that was done both safely and effectively (if you count me as a non-perfusionist).

Federowicz is a "non-perfusionist." People don't become perfusionists by qualifying for such in their own minds.

Federowicz: I refused to provide CI with a more complex circuit absent extensive training to a level where I was satisfied that the personnel using the system would be reasonably safe.

I have no idea how Federowicz ever convinced himself, much less others, that he is one of the world's leading perfusion experts. (Actually, I do have an idea, judging by the number of times he writes "I did this...I did that...I...I...I..." As I recall, he began his review of SA by comparing himself to some misunderstood mythological god. I only read Kunzman's book, last week, and he had the same opinion as I, regarding Federowicz self-absorption.

Federwicz: Countless CPB cases have been pumped worldwide with roller pumps with a microscopic incidence of air embolism due to the presence of the roller pump, per se; and with excellent outcomes.

As I've written before, ALL CPB cases have introduced microscopic air to the patients, regardless of the type of pump being used. It's absurd for anyone in cryonics to be concerned with the elimination of microbubbles in perfusion circuits, when they haven't even mastered basic perfusion with a level of competency that was achieved in conventional medicine, DECADES ago.

Federowicz: Outside of cryonics, in the world of clinical medicine, I have almost no doubt that centrifugal pumps will become the standard of care...

If this were true, it would have probably happened nearly two decades ago. There are two main reasons why this is unlikely to happen:

1. The cost of a small length of tubing for a roller pump is only a few cents, while the least expensive centrifugal head runs about $80. (They were closer to $150, a decade ago, but I doubt they'll ever be as cheap as a piece of tubing.) With managed healthcare, this will continue to be a factor in the choice of pumps.

2. Occlusive pumps in conventional medicine are components of computerized heart-lung machines that provide automatic flow adjustment in response to changing pressure, and complete shutdown with automatic line clamping in the presence of dangerous pressures or air in the lines, making the safety of the less expensive occlusive systems comparable to that of the significantly more costly centrifugal systems.

Federowicz (in response to me asking why he demanded to know if the SA flow probes worked with their washout solution, and then suggested Mathew Sullivan test the probes with water): I suggested tap water because it is cheap and readily available. If the flowmeter reads tap water flows accurately then it is worth proceeding to test it with perfusate (really expensive) under real-world conditions. I suggested tap water for the same reason you used it in training circuits: it is a cheap liquid which you can pump and which behaves enough like blood for the purpose at hand. If the SCPC flowmeter gives an invalid number for tap water, particularly if it is misleadingly close to a believable flow, then you should proceed with real caution if you proceed at all.

Why do we need to use "a cheap liquid which you can pump which behaves enough like blood for the purpose at hand"? The question wasn't whether the probe would work with blood, (and I assure everyone it would), but if it would work with SA's washout solution. Federowicz' argument for the flow probe to be tested with water was just a foolish waste of time and money (Mathew's time and salary). It should be tested with SA's washout solution.

Federowicz: I'm glad SA has such a fine perfusionist. But, no matter how good this man is, he will almost certainly not have expertise unique to and essential to proper extracorporeal management of cryopatients.

I believe SA claims to have NINE "fine perfusionists," who I am sure have a knowledge base and experience that far exceeds Federowicz'. Regardless, how could ANYONE have "expertise unique to and essential to proper extracorporeal management of cryopatients"? Other than Leaf, cryonics has a long history of reliance on amateurs who seem to think they know a lot more than they really do, a history of pumping air and subjecting patients to inappropriate pressures, and no outcomes to determine if what has been done has been of any benefit, whatsoever.

Federowicz: No patient presenting for clinical CPB even approximates the average cryopatient presenting for TBW and/or asanguineous ECMO. Even within perfusion there are areas of specialization that require additional knowledge and training: extended ECMO, emergency fem-fem CPB, nenonatal and paediatric CPB, and normothermic CPB, to name a few. What is so extraordinary about the idea that cryonics should be the same?

What is "extraordinary," here, is the degree of the "god complex" Federowicz has, and the number of people who have been buying into his alleged expertise, if you ask me.

Federowicz: As just one small example, Ms Maxim had no idea how or why conventional CPB flowmeters worked, or that they would not work in cryonics.

Federwicz assumes I didn't understand how the flowmeters worked. What I wasn't sure of, was the composition of CI's solutions. I knew it was highly likely the flowmeters wouldn't work with CI's solutions but, again, I felt the safety features were worth exploring alternate methods of measuring flow. This exploration cost ME a lot more time and money than it cost CI, and I would do it again, in a heartbeat. I still think the safety of the centrifugal pump would be of benefit in cryonics procedures, especially if amateurs are sitting behind the pump.

There was a time when I held some degree of respect for Federowicz, but that was before I read his narcissistic ramblings and complaints about medical professionals on another forum, before I started studying the dog experiments, before he lied about having been a "board-eligible perfusionist," and before I read Kunzman's book. If you ask me, it's people like Federowicz who give cryonics a bad name.