• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
- - - - -

Alcor vs CI


  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

#1 U_N

  • Guest
  • 47 posts
  • 4
  • Location:Here. Now.

Posted 12 June 2006 - 07:06 AM


My biggest question: What are the pros/cons of Alcor and CI?

If I retire in the US, it will most likely be in the North East / New England so CI might be better. Last time I checked, CI was also cheaper... but Alcor has a better 'presentation' and a few more members than CI currently.

My knowledge is limited to what I learn online from forums such as this one, so any pointers are appreciated.

---

Upon restoration, what does everyone have planned financially?
-
Will all Life Insurance companies cover cryonics? I'm wondering if I can use part of my 400K plan with SGLI to cover it.
If SGLI won't, Rudi Hoffman comes highly recommended in the area of cryonics.

Thank you for your time.

#2 Live Forever

  • Guest Recorder
  • 7,475 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Atlanta, GA USA

Posted 12 June 2006 - 07:25 AM

If money is a concern, I believe that the Cryonics Institute (CI) is way cheaper, but there are a lot of "bells and whistles" that Alcor, evidently, does that the Cryonics Institute doesn't do. I am not sure of the specifics, (perhaps Dr. Wowk or someone else will respond that has more info on this than I) but I think Alcor has a patient fund, funds research into cryo-protectants, funds other types of research, does vitrification of the head (although I think the Cryonics Institute may have just started doing this as well), and probably a variety of other things. Basically, I think most people's perception is that the Cryonics Institute is the "economy" option, and Alcor is the "luxury" option, but anything is better than nothing. If you are going to be living near the Cryonics Institute, then that actually might be a better option, because distance really should be a bigger concern for people than it is. (imo) Also, there is Trans Time, but I don't know much about them other than they are located in California (I think), and I have never heard of anyone signed up with them. Does anyone else know about them?

Most people do fund through insurance (are you the one that asked about funding in the Alcor forum? I ask because you mention Rudi Hoffman, and that was who I said over there, so I assumed it might be you.) but I am not sure if all insurance companies would do it or not, I am assuming most would.

Sorry for not much info, I am betting others will know more than I.

Edited by Live Forever, 12 July 2006 - 10:32 PM.


#3 DJS

  • Guest
  • 5,798 posts
  • 11
  • Location:Taipei
  • NO

Posted 12 June 2006 - 07:25 AM

CI cheaper, but Alcor utilizes a process called vitrification -- which prevents the formation of ice cystals and is universally agreed to be the better method of preservation (though there is still dispute over whether the difference in quality will matter when it comes to future resuscitation, molecular reconstruction...)

#4 DJS

  • Guest
  • 5,798 posts
  • 11
  • Location:Taipei
  • NO

Posted 12 June 2006 - 07:27 AM

although I think CI may have just started doing this as well


hhhmm, I wasn't aware of this, but I'm not very up-to-date on the cryonics scene.

#5 Live Forever

  • Guest Recorder
  • 7,475 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Atlanta, GA USA

Posted 12 June 2006 - 07:39 AM

hhhmm, I wasn't aware of this, but I'm not very up-to-date on the cryonics scene.


Oh, I am not up to date either, I just remember reading something about it in the Cryonics Institute wikipedia article, and now that I am looking it up, it says:
"The first human patient received the vitrification mixture in the summer of 2005 using a new procedure in which the head was vitrified while still attached to the body, which was frozen without any cryoprotectant." (along with a bunch of info on how it was developed, etc.)

Following the reference link takes you to the Cryonics Institute page on the "69th patient" which details the first one to undergo head vitrification. (a side note, it looks like there is a writeup on just about all of the patients they have done a procedure on, which is kind of cool)

I think that Alcor probably has had more experience with it, has a better mix of cryoprotectants, etc. but I can't be sure of that. I am sure if Dr. Wowk (or Ben Best, or others) sees this thread at any point, he (they) will chime in with some insights into the matter.

Edited by Live Forever, 12 July 2006 - 10:32 PM.


#6 U_N

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 47 posts
  • 4
  • Location:Here. Now.

Posted 12 June 2006 - 07:52 AM

Most people do fund through insurance (are you the one that asked about funding in the Alcor forum? I ask because you mention Rudi Hoffman, and that was who I said over there, so I assumed it might be you.)

Negative. I either go by Umbrae Noctem or my legal name - Eric.

I understand most fund through insurance, I'm just curious as to whether some insurance companies haven't been very supportive of cryonics.

#7 rjws

  • Guest
  • 143 posts
  • 0

Posted 12 June 2006 - 11:51 AM

Its not just any Insurance Company either it has to be A rated. Im in the process of signing up and my Insurance just completed. Me and my wife used Rudy Hoffman and North American Company for Life and Health Insurance. We use Alcor. Alcors Procedures are a little more advanced. I also believe it has more long term stability potential than CI.

Both compnaies have had their problems. IE. Alcor just prosecuted an Ex employee for Theft. CI has had some trouble with state and local government at times.

In the end Alcor has more financial backing by philantropists than CI,, Better techniques and more research. Of course this is just my opinion and Why I chose Alcor.

#8 U_N

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 47 posts
  • 4
  • Location:Here. Now.

Posted 12 June 2006 - 02:00 PM

Its not just any Insurance Company either it has to be A rated.

Could you ellaborate?

#9 quadclops

  • Guest
  • 316 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Pittsburgh, PA

Posted 12 June 2006 - 05:30 PM

Here's a good link for an explanation.

http://www.ambest.co...tings/guide.asp

Basically, your cryonics provider wants to be sure your insurance company is in the very top percentile as far as financial security, long term stability, and ability to payout when required.

#10 Mind

  • Life Member, Director, Moderator, Treasurer
  • 18,997 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Wausau, WI

Posted 12 June 2006 - 07:26 PM

I am in the process of siging up through Rudi Hoffman/North American Insurance/Alcor. Things have gone smoothly so far.

#11 U_N

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 47 posts
  • 4
  • Location:Here. Now.

Posted 13 June 2006 - 10:41 AM

http://www.ambest.co...tings/guide.asp

Basically, your cryonics provider wants to be sure your insurance company is in the very top percentile as far as financial security, long term stability, and ability to payout when required.

Ah, that makes sense. I think I could safely assume that SGLI is at least an A, being that 99% of all US Armed Forces has this insurance.

#12 Live Forever

  • Guest Recorder
  • 7,475 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Atlanta, GA USA

Posted 15 June 2006 - 01:16 PM

Wow, when I type in "Alcor forum" into Google, this thread comes up as the 3rd (really the second, cause the first two are both from the same site) link. It is even above the Alcor United Forum. I wonder how that happened?

#13 rjws

  • Guest
  • 143 posts
  • 0

Posted 15 June 2006 - 01:34 PM

alcor united is relatively new and prob doesn't get the traffic we do. We prob have said the word Alcor more times in our forums etc.

#14 jaydfox

  • Guest
  • 6,214 posts
  • 1
  • Location:Atlanta, Georgia

Posted 15 June 2006 - 02:27 PM

Wow, when I type in "Alcor forum" into Google, this thread comes up as the 3rd (really the second, cause the first two are both from the same site) link. It is even above the Alcor United Forum. I wonder how that happened?

What happened is that ImmInst's forum can command a high page ranking on search terms that aren't already staked out. Heh, pwned Alcor!

We need to figure out a way to leverage this ability of our forum.

#15 Live Forever

  • Guest Recorder
  • 7,475 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Atlanta, GA USA

Posted 15 June 2006 - 03:41 PM

Well, now if I do the exact same search, this page doesn't even show up on the first page. I have run into that before, doing a search for a search term, getting the results, and then doing a search for the exact same search term at some point in the next few days, and getting completely different results. Aah, well, there is still one of our results on the first page. (to the Anderson Cooper 360 story that is still in the pipeline evidently on Alcor)

#16 bgwowk

  • Guest
  • 1,715 posts
  • 125

Posted 15 June 2006 - 04:49 PM

CI's base price doesn't include standby, which means no one will be there if you are dying. That service needs to be contracted for separately. If whole body options are being compared, CI doesn't perfuse the body with cryoprotectants, only the head. CI has also not yet produced electron micrographs documenting what degree of structural preservation their solution achieves.

---BrianW

Edited by bgwowk, 15 June 2006 - 06:25 PM.


#17 Live Forever

  • Guest Recorder
  • 7,475 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Atlanta, GA USA

Posted 15 June 2006 - 05:12 PM

Dr. Wowk (or anyone else),

Is it public knowledge the type of cryoprotectant that the Cryonics Institute uses, as well as the procedure that they use to perfuse it into the body?

If so, is there a comparison to the procedure that Alcor uses?

For those of us unfamiliar, I am assuming that electron micrographs would detail the level of ice damage occuring during and after a procedure. In the case of vitrification, is the electron micrograph able to determine the level of toxicity as well as cracking, or are there other methods (a standard microscope comes to mind in the case of cracking) to determine the level of damage?

Sorry for all the questions, I am just terribly interested (and as you can see uninformed) by the whole process, and how differences in procedures are determined.

Edited by Live Forever, 12 July 2006 - 10:33 PM.


#18 U_N

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 47 posts
  • 4
  • Location:Here. Now.

Posted 15 June 2006 - 11:16 PM

CI's base price doesn't include standby, which means no one will be there if you are dying.  That service needs to be contracted for separately.  If whole body options are being compared, CI doesn't perfuse the body with cryoprotectants, only the head.  CI has also not yet produced electron micrographs documenting what degree of structural preservation their solution achieves.

---BrianW


Am I to infer from this that Alcor's price does include standby?

#19 bgwowk

  • Guest
  • 1,715 posts
  • 125

Posted 16 June 2006 - 05:57 PM

Is it public knowledge the type of cryoprotectant that CI uses, as well as the procedure that they use to perfuse it into the body?

I believe their procedure is documented on their website, but the composition of the cryoprotectant solution is not. In fairness, from 2001 to 2005 Alcor did not disclose the composition of their vitrification solution. However the composition of the solution now used by Alcor is disclosed (M22).

If so, is there a comparison to the procedure that Alcor uses?

The biggest difference is the CI only perfuses the head, while Alcor perfuses the whole body with vitrification solution (except for neuros of course). Also, Alcor uses "closed circuit" perfusion which requires less perfusate for a given mass of perfused tissue. The M22 solution used by Alcor is also the product of about $10 million in R&D directed at developing solutions of unprecedently low toxicity and high stability against ice formation for mainstream medical uses. Alcor is also much more aggressive about preventing ischemic injury after cardiac arrest compared to what CI can do when there is no separate contract for standby. I believe those are the biggest differences.

For those of us unfamiliar, I am assuming that electron micrographs would detail the level of ice damage occuring during and after a procedure. In the case of vitrification, is the electron micrograph able to determine the level of toxicity as well as cracking, or are there other methods (a standard microscope comes to mind in the case of cracking) to determine the level of damage?

Unless toxicity is so great as to cause obvious structural effects, like compromised membranes, microscopy cannot measure toxicity. Fractures cannot be detected by microscopy because fractures are macroscopic, and the odds of a microscopy sample passing through one are infinitesimally low. Fractures can be detected by either observing gross organ injury after rewarming, or non-invasively by acoustic detection during cooling ("crackphone"). Only Alcor uses this technology.

#20 benbest

  • Registrant, Advisor
  • 142 posts
  • 206
  • Location:Fort Lauderdale, Florida

Posted 16 June 2006 - 11:47 PM

I dislike these "comparison" discussions, and I prefer to ask people to do their own investigations. I definitely to not want to get into a fight with bgwowk about this. I will venture some clarifications, but if things start getting nasty I will probably not reply.

The biggest difference is the CI only perfuses the head, while Alcor perfuses the whole body with vitrification solution (except for neuros of course).


The Cryonics Institute began perfusion of the body with our most recent (74th) patient:

http://www.cryonics....ports/CI74.html

The head (brain) was perfused with vitrification solution, but the body was simply perfused with ethylene glycol. We make no pretense that the body perfusion is doing any more than reducing freezing damage. Certainly it would be a pretense to claim that every organ was vitrified. I doubt that any were, but at least the freezing damage was reduced.

Alcor is also much more aggressive about preventing ischemic injury after cardiac arrest compared to what CI can do when there is no separate contract for standby. 


Any CI Member can contract with the Florida company Suspended Animation for Standby and Stabilization-Transport at additional cost. I have such a contract myself, as do six other CI Members. Although this number is small, a month ago there were only four of us and there more in the pipeline.

http://www.cryonics....membership.html

http://www.cryonics...._Animation.html

-- Ben Best, President, Cryonics Institute

#21 bgwowk

  • Guest
  • 1,715 posts
  • 125

Posted 17 June 2006 - 02:28 AM

Am I to infer from this that Alcor's price does include standby?

Yes, within North America.

I should add that there is a blackout period for standby coverage, I think it's the first year of being signed up. Standby is still available during that time period, but it's extra.

Edited by bgwowk, 17 June 2006 - 08:55 PM.


#22 levkamensky

  • Guest
  • 43 posts
  • 0

Posted 30 June 2006 - 08:13 PM

Excuse me, I am new to this. So as I understand it, a standby team will arrive at the hospital where I will be dying and perform the cryonics procedure right after my legal death and than transport me to Alcor.

In what cities is this service available? How will they be contacted?

Edited by levkamensky, 30 June 2006 - 08:43 PM.


#23 Live Forever

  • Guest Recorder
  • 7,475 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Atlanta, GA USA

Posted 05 July 2006 - 11:30 PM

Excuse me, I am new to this. So as I understand it, a standby team will arrive at the hospital where I will be dying and perform the cryonics procedure right after my legal death and than transport me to Alcor.

In what cities is this service available? How will they be contacted?

I am not intimately familiar with the answer to your question, but I would direct you to the Cryonics Institute page on standby (link) and the Alcor procedures page (link) (which briefly mentions standby).

#24 xlifex

  • Guest
  • 80 posts
  • 0

Posted 10 July 2006 - 03:06 AM

I would caution against comparing Alcor and CI by just comparing written protocol. This is cryonics, and there is rarely a perfect match between protocol and reality.

Both Alcor and CI publish case reports nowadays, and studying them closely might assist you in making an informed decision.

I also think it's important to look at trends. Where are CI and Alcor heading?

I agree that CI's secrecy about their vitrification solution is somewhat problematic.

Edited by xlifex, 10 July 2006 - 03:20 AM.


#25 xlifex

  • Guest
  • 80 posts
  • 0

Posted 10 July 2006 - 03:19 AM

Am I to infer from this that Alcor's price does include standby?


Correct. In the case of CI you need a separate contract with Suspended Animation, Inc. in Florida.

One difference is more paperwork.

Another difference is that CI members not only have the choice to have a standby or not, they are also free to choose between (future) competing standby providers.

#26 U_N

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 47 posts
  • 4
  • Location:Here. Now.

Posted 12 July 2006 - 10:09 PM

xlifex, I appreciate your input and clarification.

#27 drus

  • Guest
  • 278 posts
  • 20
  • Location:?

Posted 01 November 2006 - 12:40 AM

I am with CI but I think both are good choices. CI and Alcor are the two best in the world in my opinion. I would consider price and location. Although I must admit, I'de feel alot better if CI had in house standby services for their members.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users