X-Message-Number: 28215
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2006 10:37:35 -0600
From: "Anthony ." <>
Subject: Re: Cryonics for embryos

> Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2006 06:59:21 -0700 (PDT)
> From: human screener <>
> Subject: TMT: TimesUK article-->DNA blacklist-->Cryonics for embryos

> I
> wonder if anyone here thinks Alcor or CI would be
> willing  or able-- or not-- to store cryopreserved
> zygotes or embryos for future repair, reanimation,
> adoption and implantation?

This is an idea I've been interested in since I understood what
cryonics was properly about. If you believe that an embryo (at XYZ
stage) is a human person (obviously it is a human life as it is made
from human cells, but so is a toe-nail) then cryonics already works as
these "persons" are routinely "reanimated".

The problem here is similar to one I've previously pointed out. If you
do not believe that these cellular structures are persons, then you
are left only with a potential person, who is not as important as an
actual person. Because of modern tech., potential persons are inherent
in any human cells. If we're going to bother to freeze unwanted
embryos (in a society which barely bothers to care for unwanted
children), then why not freeze any jettisoned/superflous human cell?

I suppose that this is a matter of emotion - the embryo has a greater
emotional attraction because it is one step closer to being a real
person compared to a reproductive cell (which - outside the lab -
needs to unite with another), or another human cell (which needs tech
intervention before it can become a person). It is important to note
the irrationalities and inconsistencies in these issues (i.e. I'd
rather seen every poverty-stricken child cared for before I see a cent
spent on unwanted xygotes).

> Alcor
> or CI could offer extra services to frozen-embryo
> storage centers a chance for really long term storage
> with the intention to reanimate and reimplant in the
> far future-

A great idea.
Not only would our cryonics providers be making more money and
diversifying, they'd also be proving a point about cryobiology and
perhaps pleasing a powerful ideology (i.e. pro-life) which, (despite
it's excesses, hypocrisy, and short-sightedness) could be so appeased
in this case that they might view "corpsicles" with less alarm.

>As it turns
> out, labs charge higher and higher amounts to parents
> to keep unused frozen embryos for longer and longer
> periods of time making long term storage too expensive
> for parents who are then forced to destroy the frozen
> embryo.

Horrible.
Again, cryonics providers could offer this service to anyone is this
difficult situation.

Before my son was born, I asked C.I. if they offered freezing for
stem-cells taken from the umbilical cord - unfortunately they do not,
but I was directed to the relevant providers. If freezing stem-cells
is beyond C.I.s abilities, freezing embryos will probably be too.

> A cooperative
> mechanism could be set up with the embryo donation
> center to select a frozen embryo at any time for
>  reanimation  and implantation.

Do pro-life groups create funding for people who cannot afford to keep
embryos alive? If so, these charities might be approached to be part
of this endeavour (& if the pro-life movement does not do this, it is
another example of its hypocrisy).

The problem is that a lot of embryos are not necessarily the genetic
offspring of the people who want them (e.g. some DNA comes from a
donar who does not have fertility problems) in which case, when
technology like this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/5154026.stm

gets offered, people are more likely to abandon their embryos and turn
to reproduction that will involve their own genes.

Anthony

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=28215