X-Message-Number: 8717
From:  (Norman Doering)
Newsgroups: sci.cryonics
Subject: Is this idea worth anything?
Date: 5 Nov 1997 06:58:00 GMT
Message-ID: <63p5do$mat$>

While reading Tom Matthews post on "Re: Are eggs more difficult 
than embryos to freeze?" in news:
I had a rather, IMHO, neat idea on where the cryonics community 
might get funds for cryonic research and solve a political 
conflict with a compromise all at the same time. I don't know if 
anyone else has thought of this before or not, or even if there is 
a flaw in the idea. So, I'm putting it out here to see what kind 
of comments it generates.
 
If embryos can be frozen could they be frozen after abortions?
I think the catholics and conservative Christians might be (or 
should be if they're honest about their values -- something I have 
doubts about when it comes to the upper echelon of political 
players and money men in their ranks) interested in funding 
research into freezing fetuses for longer periods and at later 
stages in pregancy and doing the operation and storage as 
economically as possible because then they can offer this service 
as an effective alternative standard abortion practices that kill 
the fetus. The women who use the service wouldn't have to agonize 
over the choice so much because they know they're not ready to 
bring a child up -- they'd be able to reverse their decision when 
they are ready and reclaim their child at a later date if they 
wanted to, or let it sit in storage until they lose the right, 
perhaps only after death, to an adoption scheme. I'm sure most 
women seeking abortions would jump at that alternative if it could 
be offered regardless of any laws pro or con on abortion -- bingo, 
its not a divisive issue any longer once the choice is possible. 
The church probably has a lot more money to throw into such 
research than the cryonics community.  
 
The side effect of this kind of research would be that we'd learn 
a lot more about freezing, storing and re-animating larger complex 
life forms, fetuses at various stages of development, that could 
spill over into how we should properly freeze and reanimate 
cryonics patients. Shouldn't a very late term fetus be as 
difficult a problem as a cryonics patient? 
 
I think, in my more cynical moments, that the right to life 
movement is really a ploy for political power for the church 
hiearchy -- but I doubt if that matters because it's obviously not 
so at the grass roots level. I think if this idea were spread 
around at the grass roots level the churchs that preach this right 
to life message would almost have to look into cryonics research
on animal fetuses in various stages of development or be branded 
hypocrits more interested in gaining political power than in 
saving the lives they claim they want to save.
 
Tom Matthews <> wrote:
 
> I believe that this is because embryos are frozen at the 8-16 
> cell stage.
 
This sounds like it might be too early for most abortions.
 
> However, each cell is still equipotent. Therefore, if a few 
> cells do not survive the cryopreservation, rewarming, and 
> implantation, it does not matter. The resulting baby will be 
> "none the worse for wear".  
 
When does the differentiation of the cells happen? Does anyone 
know what kind of possibilities might be near term on this kind of 
freezing?
 
> I don't know what the largest is but I believe the standard is 8 
> - 16 cells. Dimensions are in micrometers not millimeters. By 
> one month all of the different parts of the body, including 
> organs are 'blocked out'.  The foetus is by then enormously 
> complex, consisting of millions of cells, even though its length 
> is still only a few millimeters and its weight well under a 
> gram.  It would be a major feat to reversibly cryopreserve a 
> foetus even at one month of age.  
 
But, could it be done, in probabality, if enough research money
were put behind the task? 
 
>> Are human embryos always frozen immediately after
>> fertilization or are they allowed to grow some?
>
> They are allowed to divide to the 8-16 cell stage. I don't know 
> how long that takes. Just minutes to a few hours, I would guess.  
>
> --Tom
 
That's obviously not good enough for intercepting abortions, but 
is their a probability of research changing that?
 
If you think this is a good idea, please spread it around, someone 
may act on it.

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=8717