Re: Cryopreserving the unborn

From: Eugene Leitl (
Date: Wed Jan 19 2000 - 19:11:35 MST

"Successfully" sounds better than it is. I would call something
"successful" if it gives you a survival ratio of 80-90%. We're far
away from that in cryopreservation.

Cryobiologists are notorious liars. If just a few cells survive you
can amplify them, so you say "the method works". It is exactly the
same reason as to why quantitiative cryopreservation of differentiated
tissue (organs) is yet unsuccessful.

Amara Graps writes:
> The egg cells were prone to cracking and the process didn't work well.
> Sure, embryos are frozen successfully, but there are a lot of women
> in the world who would probably pay well to have a younger version of
> their eggs preserved for a future time when they are more willing,
> and in a better position in their lives, to have children.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:02:23 MDT