Good points! I'm going to continue with Alcor for now (see other comments), but if they don't work out for any reason, I should probably give CI another look (and the others you mention) before giving up. Thank you.
Thank you for this; I will simplify and do as you suggest, leaving it entirely in my wife's hands.
yes, I realize you don't expect that, but there more than 0% chance it will happen
Fair enough, but if I'm that wrong about her, I have much bigger problems than this extremely-unlikely-to-work process (my analysis, I know many people think cryonics is more likely to work than I do) becoming less likely to work than before :)
Thank you for your kind and thoughtful reply; I really appreciate it.
Here's the quote:
If significant damage to brain tissue (beyond the normal amount from dying) has occurred or has likely occurred, from a source such as fire, decomposition, physical impact, neurodegenerative disease, etc., I do not wish to be cryopreserved. Define "significant damage" as damage that would drastically and likely permanently alter my personality, memories, or ability to live a normal life, if I were magically immediately revived and all non-brain-damage to my body was reversed. For example, a car crash, in which the primary cause of death is head trauma, would constitute "significant damage". Similarly, a car crash in which the primary cause of death is blood loss, and in which there is no good reason to believe that massive brain damage has probably occurred (beyond the typical amount from blood loss and death), would not constitute "significant damage". In the event that there is a question of whether some amount of damage constitutes "significant damage", my wife, [name], should make the decision regarding whether or not my remains should be cryopreserved.
As you can see, it's a pretty big departure. Given the excellent points you and others raise, I think I will try giving them the benefit of the doubt, and simplify my criteria for Alcor, putting the decision solely in my wife's hands, with the provision that I should be preserved if she is not present and cannot be immediately reached. If I do not get any more seemingly underhanded pushback (them pushing back a little/stating their concerns is fine, but any more sneakily making huge changes would increase my concerns), then I'll write this off to the factors you suggest, and proceed. Thank you!
Excellent point, it's not Alcor or no cryonics, thank you.