Alcor has new problems. Apparently, at least partly as a result of the adverse Ted Williams publicity, some of the powers-that-be in Arizona want to start regulating cryonics facilities.

The problem, of course, is that there are no laws explicitly applying to the practice of cryonics (and probably shouldn’t be, given how poorly-understood a field it is, particularly by the people who would be making the laws). Fortunately, we still live in an America in which, at least in theory, that which isn’t explicitly illegal is legal. But some ill-informed people in the Grand Canyon State are apparently unhappy about that.

As the article points out, cryonics patients are presently treated as organ donations, which means (fortunately) that the funeral industry has no regulatory authority, and that the only relevant agency is the FDA, which scarcely pays it any attention.

The head of the funeral association claims that in the process of doing head-only suspensions, Alcor is “mutilating a body,” which is in theory illegal. Of course, the same could be said of anyone facilitating organ donation, so I don’t think that they really want to test this in court.

The most disturbing and frightening thing, of course, is the ignorance about the whole process among the lawmakers.

Rep. Wally Straughn, D-Dist. 15, says Arizona needs to look at regulating the cryonics industry. ?New technologies will likely offer options for the deceased that we have yet to consider,? he said, adding that options for those who might be revived from a frozen state also need to be considered.

No, not until that’s on the verge of happening. It (unfortunately) is a long way off, and unlikely to occur during Rep. Straughn’s term.

?We really need to start working on guidelines before companies like Alcor proliferate,? Mr. Straughn said.

There’s certainly little danger of that, at current rates. For now, the best course is caveat emptor. By the time they’re signed up, cryonics patients are made extremely aware of the promise, and risk of the process. If someone makes fraudulent claims (e.g., guarantees of reanimation), then they can be prosecuted for that, but short of that, no one right now is smart enough to regulate this industry.

Fortunately, some legislators understand the problem:

Rep. Phil Hanson, R-Dist. 9, disagrees.

?I?m not sure that I would give great support to a bill placing regulations on cryonics companies at this time,? he said. ?It is such a small facility and those that are considering the process should be made aware of the pros and cons by the company as a good business practice.?

Exactly, and bravo to Rep. Hanson.

Mr. Thomas has called for the creation of a state level board to regulate Alcor, but Rep. Linda Gray, R-Dist. 10, said, ?It is a good idea to bring this company under the regulation of the funeral directors instead of creating another board.?

Mr. Stump said he also wants to bring the regulation of cemeteries under the state Board of Funeral Directors and Embalmers, rather than the Board of Real Estate.

Mr. Thomas is the head of the state Funeral Directors’ board. He doesn’t explain why funeral directors are competent to regulate a medical procedure, but he does describe why he wants to take control:

Mr. Thomas put aside the belief among Alcor supporters that medical scientists someday might be able to revive bodies that have been frozen for years.

?There?s no difference between cryonics and cremation,? he said. ?You?re gone forever.? ?

The notion that this industry would be regulated by someone who fundamentally disbelieves its premises is, as I said, frightening.