![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
archerships[This is a rough draft of the letter I'm planning to send tomorrow to the members of the Arizona House Health Committee, which is due to vote on the HB 2637 on Thursday. HB2637, if passed, would severely harm Alcor's ability to properly care for cryonics patients. Comments and and criticisms welcome. See my previous post for further details.]
Dear [representative]
Thank you for taking the time to read my letter. My name is Chris Rasch. I have a B.S. degree in biology from Stanford University, and I worked for several years in organ banking research, first at the Naval Medical Research Institute in Bethesda, MD and then for 21st Century Medicine, a biotech startup outside of Los Angeles. Throughout that time, I did research into the long term, low temperature storage of whole organs, such as the liver, kidney, and heart. (I'm no longer doing research, but I still follow the field closely).
I'm writing to express my strong opposition to HB 2637, which was recently introduced by Representative Robert Stump. This bill appears to be intended to specifically bring the Alcor Life Extension Foundation, a cryonics firm based in Scottsdale, AZ, under the regulatory control of the Funeral and Embalmer's Board, and to strip Alcor of the protections of the Uniform Anatomical Gift Act (which is the regulatory apparatus under which cryonics patients are currently governed).
HB 2637, if passed in its current form, will have several severe negative consequences for both Alcor and for the citizens of Arizona. Some of the most important consequences are as follows:
* Alcor's goal is to cryopreserve human patients in the best manner possible, in the hopes that future technology will be able to revive them. Cryonics companies, at the highest level of care, use similar techniques to those used for organ transplantation and storage. Such techniques require as sophisticated training and equipment as those required by transplant surgeons.
Embalmers, on the other hand, are primarily concerned with preserving the cosmetic appearance of life for a few days until a funeral can be performed. Although a demanding task in it's own right, embalming involves very different chemicals, tools, techniques, and standards of care from those required by cryonics patients. No attempt is made to preserve the tissue for future revival, and embalming procedures, by design, result in the immediate death of any living tissue that might remain. The Embalming and Funeral Board is as inappropriate a regulatory body for cryonics companies as it would be for transplant surgeons.
* New technologies often raise novel regulatory issues, and it's important that new regulations be carefully crafted to avoid stifling innovation. Ideally, all parties most affected by new legislation will be consulted. Unfortunately, although the apparent target of HB 2637, Alcor was not notified of stakeholder meetings, nor had any input into the drafting of this amendment.
Many of Alcor's members are scientists, doctors, programmers, engineers, and graduates of top research universities (Caltech, MIT, Stanford, etc.). Many members work for biotech or high-tech companies. When considering whether or not to locate in Arizona, these companies are going to look at how carefully the Arizona legislature treats companies that raise new regulatory issues. If they see that new regulations are applied inappropriately and without consultation of the regulated companies, they will be less likely to locate to Arizona.
* Arizona is known as a state that values individual freedom, and most Arizona citizens would probably agree that people should be able to do with their bodies as they wish, or spend their money as they please (even if others believe their actions to be foolish)--provided, of course, that they are made aware of the relevant risk, and do not harm others.
Alcor patient are betting that future medicine will be able to revive them. However, there's no guarantee that sufficiently advanced medicine will be developed, or that Alcor will be able to keep them cryopreserved long enough to take advantage of it, if it is developed. Thus, the primary risk Alcor patients face is the risk that their money will be wasted. Does Alcor make that risk clear? Although Alcor promises to do the best they can to revive their patients, everyone who signs up for cryopreservation (or their legal guardians) must read and sign lengthy documents that make it very clear that there is no guarantee that any patient will ever be revived.
Does Alcor pose excessive risks to their neighbors? Alcor abides by all state and federal regulations governing research facilities, and has successfully passed all inspections by OSHA, USDA, the EPA, and other regulatory bodies. No complaints have ever been raised by Alcor's neighbors, nor does Alcor impose risks on the community any greater than those imposed by other biomedical research facilities. Finally, I'm sure Alcor staff would be happy to provide a tour of the facility to any legislator with any remaining concerns.
Therefore, since Alcor patients voluntarily and with informed consent take upon themselves the risks involved, and since Alcor poses no special risks to the community, there is no need that would demand the hasty implementation of flawed regulation.
Amendment HB 2637 would severly harm Alcor's present and future patients, give pause to bio/high-tech companies considering locating in Arizona, and would limit the fundamental freedom of Arizona citizens to determine what will be done with their own bodies. Cryonics is still a very experimental procedure and to implement regulations prematurely may do more harm than good. Therefore, I would encourage you to vote no on HB 2637, and postpone future regulations until the best way to regulate cryonics is more easily discerned.
Thanks again for taking the time to read my letter. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to call me at (919) 395 0856, or email me at crasch@openknowledge.org.
Respectfully yours,
Christopher M. Rasch
Dear [representative]
Thank you for taking the time to read my letter. My name is Chris Rasch. I have a B.S. degree in biology from Stanford University, and I worked for several years in organ banking research, first at the Naval Medical Research Institute in Bethesda, MD and then for 21st Century Medicine, a biotech startup outside of Los Angeles. Throughout that time, I did research into the long term, low temperature storage of whole organs, such as the liver, kidney, and heart. (I'm no longer doing research, but I still follow the field closely).
I'm writing to express my strong opposition to HB 2637, which was recently introduced by Representative Robert Stump. This bill appears to be intended to specifically bring the Alcor Life Extension Foundation, a cryonics firm based in Scottsdale, AZ, under the regulatory control of the Funeral and Embalmer's Board, and to strip Alcor of the protections of the Uniform Anatomical Gift Act (which is the regulatory apparatus under which cryonics patients are currently governed).
HB 2637, if passed in its current form, will have several severe negative consequences for both Alcor and for the citizens of Arizona. Some of the most important consequences are as follows:
* Alcor's goal is to cryopreserve human patients in the best manner possible, in the hopes that future technology will be able to revive them. Cryonics companies, at the highest level of care, use similar techniques to those used for organ transplantation and storage. Such techniques require as sophisticated training and equipment as those required by transplant surgeons.
Embalmers, on the other hand, are primarily concerned with preserving the cosmetic appearance of life for a few days until a funeral can be performed. Although a demanding task in it's own right, embalming involves very different chemicals, tools, techniques, and standards of care from those required by cryonics patients. No attempt is made to preserve the tissue for future revival, and embalming procedures, by design, result in the immediate death of any living tissue that might remain. The Embalming and Funeral Board is as inappropriate a regulatory body for cryonics companies as it would be for transplant surgeons.
* New technologies often raise novel regulatory issues, and it's important that new regulations be carefully crafted to avoid stifling innovation. Ideally, all parties most affected by new legislation will be consulted. Unfortunately, although the apparent target of HB 2637, Alcor was not notified of stakeholder meetings, nor had any input into the drafting of this amendment.
Many of Alcor's members are scientists, doctors, programmers, engineers, and graduates of top research universities (Caltech, MIT, Stanford, etc.). Many members work for biotech or high-tech companies. When considering whether or not to locate in Arizona, these companies are going to look at how carefully the Arizona legislature treats companies that raise new regulatory issues. If they see that new regulations are applied inappropriately and without consultation of the regulated companies, they will be less likely to locate to Arizona.
* Arizona is known as a state that values individual freedom, and most Arizona citizens would probably agree that people should be able to do with their bodies as they wish, or spend their money as they please (even if others believe their actions to be foolish)--provided, of course, that they are made aware of the relevant risk, and do not harm others.
Alcor patient are betting that future medicine will be able to revive them. However, there's no guarantee that sufficiently advanced medicine will be developed, or that Alcor will be able to keep them cryopreserved long enough to take advantage of it, if it is developed. Thus, the primary risk Alcor patients face is the risk that their money will be wasted. Does Alcor make that risk clear? Although Alcor promises to do the best they can to revive their patients, everyone who signs up for cryopreservation (or their legal guardians) must read and sign lengthy documents that make it very clear that there is no guarantee that any patient will ever be revived.
Does Alcor pose excessive risks to their neighbors? Alcor abides by all state and federal regulations governing research facilities, and has successfully passed all inspections by OSHA, USDA, the EPA, and other regulatory bodies. No complaints have ever been raised by Alcor's neighbors, nor does Alcor impose risks on the community any greater than those imposed by other biomedical research facilities. Finally, I'm sure Alcor staff would be happy to provide a tour of the facility to any legislator with any remaining concerns.
Therefore, since Alcor patients voluntarily and with informed consent take upon themselves the risks involved, and since Alcor poses no special risks to the community, there is no need that would demand the hasty implementation of flawed regulation.
Amendment HB 2637 would severly harm Alcor's present and future patients, give pause to bio/high-tech companies considering locating in Arizona, and would limit the fundamental freedom of Arizona citizens to determine what will be done with their own bodies. Cryonics is still a very experimental procedure and to implement regulations prematurely may do more harm than good. Therefore, I would encourage you to vote no on HB 2637, and postpone future regulations until the best way to regulate cryonics is more easily discerned.
Thanks again for taking the time to read my letter. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to call me at (919) 395 0856, or email me at crasch@openknowledge.org.
Respectfully yours,
Christopher M. Rasch
no subject
Date: 2004-02-24 01:39 am (UTC)Re:
Date: 2004-02-24 02:22 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-02-24 03:10 am (UTC)That's patients. Good letter.