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

Photo
- - - - -

21CM UR solution


  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 caliban

  • Admin, Advisor, Director
  • 9,154 posts
  • 587
  • Location:UK

Posted 07 October 2005 - 07:45 AM


1) is this the one?

lactose, mannitol or trehalose, glucose, reduced glutathione, adenine HCl, K.sub.2HPO.sub.4, KCl, and NaHCO.sub.3.




2) Will URS have impact on cryonics?

#2 bgwowk

  • Guest
  • 1,715 posts
  • 125

Posted 07 October 2005 - 08:28 PM

That's not URS (University of Rochester solution, a hypothermic heart preservtion solution). Those are the ingredients of LM5 carrier solution, as described in Table 1 of the paper

http://www.21cm.com/...on_advances.pdf

LM5 is the carrier solution (base perfusate into which cryoprotectants are dissolved) of the M22 vitrification solution now used by Alcor for cryonics cases.

What do you mean "the one"?

---BrianW

#3 caliban

  • Topic Starter
  • Admin, Advisor, Director
  • 9,154 posts
  • 587
  • Location:UK

Posted 08 October 2005 - 04:50 PM

What do you mean "the one"?

I simply meant: Is that the innovaton which characterises URS?

I conclude that the answer to my second question is also "no" ?

#4 bgwowk

  • Guest
  • 1,715 posts
  • 125

Posted 08 October 2005 - 04:55 PM

Caliban, I'm still confused. This thread reads like a continuation of a conversation somewhere else that I don't remember having. To be clear: You are interested in University of Rochester hypothermic heart preservation solution, and want to know the key innovation behind it? Perhaps it would help if you told me where you read about UR solution.

I will say that there is an innovation in URS that may be very useful to cryonics, but unfortunately it's still proprietary.

---BrianW

#5 caliban

  • Topic Starter
  • Admin, Advisor, Director
  • 9,154 posts
  • 587
  • Location:UK

Posted 08 October 2005 - 05:28 PM

Sorry Brian here is the genesis of this question:

Laz was send to the 21CM thread in the "companies" forum. This prompted me to check their/your website for news: and there I found the announcement about the NIH grant which mentioned URS.
I thought "gee... wonder what that is?"
So I checked the patent office and there I found a new application by Fahy dated July 14, 2005 with the above specifications. I did not study the claims nor the teaching very closely, but it looked like a carrier solution, slight improvement over the previous one. Then I thought "Ok, maybe URS is just an improved carrier solution, let me ask in the forums"

see?

PS: If the above ist just LM5, the application seems to come a bit late?

PPS:

I will say that there is an innovation in URS that may be very useful to cryonics, but unfortunately it's still proprietary.

Aaarg. Not that game again. Take out a bloody patent thats what they are for. Also, you live in the US, so its first to invent anyway.

#6 bgwowk

  • Guest
  • 1,715 posts
  • 125

Posted 08 October 2005 - 07:11 PM

UR solution was invented by Ting Wang at the University of Rochester many years ago. We have commercial rights to it, but it's not in our patent portfolio.

"First to invent" is being changed to harmonize the U.S. system with the rest of the world. That aside, once you publish an idea you relinquish all rights to patent it unless you do so within one year.

If we published every new idea we have as soon as we think it, we'd never have anything to patent. If we patented every new idea we generate before validating it and cost justifying a patent, we'd spend all our time and money on patents, not research. As it is, our legal bills would make you faint.

I don't know why you speak of "games." For our staff size, we publish and patent lots of work, but can only do so when it is ready to published. In hindsight, it was unprofessional of me to say anything about hypothetical utilities of UR solution because I shouldn't be thinking out loud in public forums. My bad.

---BrianW

#7 caliban

  • Topic Starter
  • Admin, Advisor, Director
  • 9,154 posts
  • 587
  • Location:UK

Posted 09 October 2005 - 06:58 PM

When it comes to organ preservation, I have few objections (although paying a lawyer cannot be an entirely bad thing of course :)) ) .

But when it comes to cryonics? Not only do I not think that people like Pichugin are scouring message boards to steal your ideas, even if they did: it would not have much commercial impact. All this cloak and dagger stuff has done nothing but harm. There is one business where I respect that absolute secrecy is merited: magic. But I think cryonics wants to get away from that.

#8 bgwowk

  • Guest
  • 1,715 posts
  • 125

Posted 09 October 2005 - 07:59 PM

Without patent protection, there would be nothing to stop you-know-who from just looking up the formula for M22, mixing a few chemicals, and advertising on his website that he now offered the same cryonics technology as Alcor.

Claiming rights to hard-won IP is the only way to have some semblance of quality control in an unregulated industry full of crazy people on the margins.

---BrianW




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users