This is a linkpost for https://biostasis.substack.com/p/the-case-for-brain-only-preservation
Also, legally in some jurisdictions brain is not a body, as it doesn't have bones, but only a tissue sample.
Right, that one is part of "Easier emergency relocation" (I just edited the summary to add it, but it's in the post), but maybe that legal status also has more advantages than just transport.
An advantage related to compatibility with a funeral with the body on view is that it allows for covert brain extraction. The typical application might be where the subject's family is against the whole idea. But I'm more drawn to imagining a Mission Impossible-like plot where the brain of an important deceased politician must be retrieved for interrogation.
How much more advantageous would this be than a "head only" option? To get to the brain, wouldn't you have to cut open the head anyways?
All the advantages listed in the post are advantages compared to preserving the skull along with the brain.
Advantages of leaving the brain in the skull:
The post links to this Isolation of the Brain for Human Cryopreservation.
I was told by someone performing cryopreservations that you can remove the brain and just leave a scar at the top of the forehead hidden by hair.
This is a great compilation of the arguments for why cryonics service providers should offer a brain-only option.
Not mentioned in the article: Note that a brain-only option is also offered by OregonCryo and Cryonics Germany.
Summary of the linked post:
The main advantages are:
Related posts: