Lokjhgfdswqertgfvcdsdefrtghbv cxdfrgthn vcdszefty7 g hh hh hhh h hh h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h huhu huhu hu hu hu uh hu hu hu h uhu hu hu uh hu hu hu u hhu hu uh h uhu uh hu uh u huh hu
Cryogenic freezing is a science fiction idea we have always mulled over as something for the future. There is no harm in science adding this to the docket of things to look into. Any advancements might lead to creative ideas for maintaining stem cells and other organs. Ultimately, if private research wants to focus on this, more power to them.
As long as the freezing of human specimens is beneficial to the scientific research, then I do not believe that there is a problem with it. Although others may argue that it is morally wrong to do so, I do not really believe that morality has anything to do, good or bad, with the freezing of human specimens.
I personally think that life extension science includes cryogenic freezing of human specimens so that the human body will not deriate over time. I personally think that cryogenic freezing of human specimens helps the skin as well as the overall human body. I personally think that if the body isn't cryogenic freezing of human specimens it wouldn't be firm.
Life extension science should include cryogenic freezing of human specimens only at the predetermined will of each person. People can either donate their bodies to cryogenics or pay to have their bodies preserved for the future for their own benefit. Only in the case of criminals, especially those on death row, not be a part of cryogenic freezing.
Life extension science should not include cryogenic freezing of humans. I do not think we were meant to be frozen for long periods of time and I also think that does not really extend human life as much as allows someone to be able to experience life 50 years from now.