Comments on: Specimen Standards for Evidence-Based Human Cryopreservation Organizations, Part 1 A revolution in time. Thu, 11 Apr 2013 01:11:28 +0000 hourly 1 By: Ronald Havelock Ronald Havelock Fri, 28 Sep 2012 17:45:26 +0000 Impressive work. I had forgotten that a 1969 meeting was held at my house in Ann Arbor, and that such an impressive list of experts could be assembled at that time.
It is clear that there was a general mood of optimism regarding the future of cryonics which has not been sustained in the 43 years since.

By: Taurus Londono Taurus Londono Wed, 01 Aug 2012 00:32:08 +0000 Just seeing this article for the first time; I now appreciate the use of the so-called valknut symbol.

“Cryonics organizations need a separate, defensive organization which can act semi-covertly or covertly as needed… This would allow some measure of psychological tranquility to exist in the organization as a whole…”

It could, of course, have a negative effect on any potential for psychological tranquility. The Worldwide Guardian Office and the JDL are controversial organizations; in the case of Scientology, this “semi-covert” group undoubtedly adds a great deal to the public’s negative attitudes about Scientology; indeed, reports of surveillance and subversion of church detractors are regularly pointed to for justification of widespread ill will (and what are arguably even more subversive anti-Scientology actions in kind, like hacking and protests).

Even if an organization like the one you envision were relatively benign, the media would latch on to even the slightest hint of secrecy for the opportunity to implant conspiracy theories, further alienating the public (and potential cryonicists) from the parent organization (if not cryonics in general).

*Don’t misunderstand me*
I actually agree with your sentiments regarding the need to protect patients (and the organization as a whole). A defensive organization may well be *best* for cryonicists in the long-term, for our safety and that of and the patients under our care.

I’m simply not convinced that the existence of such an organization would be beneficial to ongoing efforts (and they *will* be ongoing for as long as I can imagine) to penetrate the public consciousness and increase acceptance in the foreseeable future. In fact, I think there’s a possibility that such an organization might undermine such efforts.

Again, just playing devil’s advocate here.
My gut instinct is all for it; protecting family is priority one.