# data[].attributes.body
Cryonics is a relatively new issue: the first cryopreserved person was James Bedford, in 1977 by Alcore Life Extension Foundation.  It has been an issue since the first cryopreservation. Often, it is covered in the media neutrally, as there are many unknowns in the outcome. There is no political background, but there questions of autonomy and how cryopreserved individuals fall under law.
(Alcore, Huxtable).

# data[].attributes.body
Decisions of cryopreservation are often made with the idea to ease the terminally ill. As there are questions of likelihood and an element of uncertainty, the hope that the possibility for a different outcome in a different time is often cited in decisions to cryopreserve. In the case of JS, a teenage girl that was granted the ability to be cryopreserved by the court upon her death of terminal cancer, the happiness and emotional well-being of the teenager was paramount.

“... the hospital reportedly saw JS’s happiness as contingent on her desires being honored… the hospital’s inclination to address JS’s ‘present distress’ and the need to consider ‘JS’s welfare during life’” (Huxtable 488).

# data[].attributes.body
Religious beliefs surrounding death are a source of controversy. The purpose of cryopreservation is most often to prevent the death of a person that would otherwise be facing death as a result of old age or illness. In many religions, death is something that is decided by a higher power, and man’s interference, as cryonics is, defies this. The decision to be cryopreserved is that of the self, and carried out by private companies, so religious ethicality is case by case.

# data[].attributes.body
Intense speculation over whether cryonics is able to work, as well as what the future holds for those that have been cryopreserved in the event of their reanimation causes controversy. It is this controversy that will be explored. The idea is largely the different between the present individual and the future, reanimated individual. Ultimately, who takes precedent in the decision to cryopreserve?

# data[].attributes.body
Works Cited

“About Alcor.” Alcor, www.alcor.org/AboutAlcor/index.html

Best, Benjamin P. “Scientific justification of cryonics practice.” Rejuvenation research vol. 11,2 (2008): 493-503. doi:10.1089/rej.2008.0661

Cohen, Claudio. “Bioethicists must rethink the concept of death: the idea of brain death is not appropriate for cryopreservation.” Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) vol. 67,2 (2012): 93-4. doi:10.6061/clinics/2012(02)01

Huxtable, Richard. “Cryonics in the Courtroom: Which Interests? Whose Interests?.” Medical law review vol. 26,3 (2018): 476-499. doi:10.1093/medlaw/fwx045.

# data[].attributes.body
While the decision to cryopreserve is made by the current person, the future person is not able to consent in the same way and cannot continually consent. It is the future person that has to live with these choices. The decision to cryopreserve is a question thereof of precedent autonomy, where a person’s coherent choices dictate what happens with a lack of coherency, such as treatments. The question becomes if the present individual has the right to decide the future of an arguably different individual, as is the implication for cryonics. In the case of cryonics, the individual may return to coherency and yet face the consequences of the original decision of precedent autonomy.

“The major philosophical challenge is one of personal identity: is the drafter the same individual to whom it will apply, and if not, what is the source of his or her authority for binding the future entity?” (Huxtable 486).

# data[].attributes.body
The quality of life of the reanimated individual may be compromised as a result of potential damage obtained while preserved, or that the individual may face in the treatment and the reversal of damage. It is speculated the damage that is obtained with long periods of cryopreservation will be reversible, but to what extent is unclear and to what cost. Treatments for diseases that caused the initial preservation, such as cancer, may affect the quality of life as well (Huxtable 487).

# data[].attributes.body
The living circumstances of the individual can also be called into question. Who will be left to care for the newly reanimated person? How will future procedures be paid for? The individual will be left to navigate a changed world that they are unfamiliar with, without guidance. Reanimation is reliant on the ability to be cured as well, not the ability to receive the treatment.

“Who will care for the reanimated person, particularly if she is a minor? … how will the reanimated person support themselves? … how comfortably will the reanimated person inhabit a future society?” (Huxtable 489).

# data[].attributes.body
Cryonics is the practice of cryopreserving people in the hopes that they will be reanimated in the future.

# data[].attributes.body
200 people are cryopreserved as of 2010, in United States and Russia (Cohen).

# data[].attributes.body
Cryopreservation involves freezing people to a point where their metabolic processes are effectively stopped and their tissues are preserved. This helps to prevent death and damage and allow for later reanimation.

Convection is used to rapidly cool the patient, as it is the fastest method. Convection is moving water.

Vitrification is also used. It is the solidification of liquid to a "amorphous," or glassy, state. Examples include amber.

Patients are stored in liquid nitrogen.

# data[].attributes.body
The ability to cryopreserve successfully is the ability to solve the problems of the present and the past. Those who are cryopreserved can be awoken to a world that saves them from what was an imminent death. This is the end goal of cryonics.

“If complex changes due to aging are reversible at some future date, then similarly complex changes due to stopped blood flow and cryopreservation may also be reversible, with life-saving results for anyone with medical needs that exceed current capabilities (Best 493).

# data[].attributes.headline
Science justifies the ability to cryopreserve

# data[].attributes.subject
Science justifies the ability to cryopreserve

# data[].attributes.body
The proposed success of cryopreservation is based on current scientific information. The discovery that metabolic processes would essentially be frozen with the low temperature prevents natural cell death events from occurring, and processes that prevent the tissues from freezing also prevents cell death. Hopes for the future include that any damage caused by the preservation itself will be able to be reversed as well, as future medical ability progresses. The legal death that is required for cryonic processes to begin does not mean “irreversibly dead,” as “death is a process, not an event” (Best 493).

“If there are plausible models for the repair and reanimation of cryopreserved cryonics subjects, it seems reasonable to rely upon them when deciding on human cryopreservation as a long-term treatment that many not may not succeed” (Best 500-501).

# data[].attributes.headline
"Containers are finally immersed in liquid nitrogen at a temperature of -196°C for long-term care."

# data[].attributes.subject
"Containers are finally immersed in liquid nitrogen at a temperature of -196°C for long-term care."