Here's why some people choose cryonics to store their bodies and brains after death | MIT Technology Review

You need to enable JavaScript to view this site.

Skip to ContentMIT Technology ReviewFeaturedTopicsNewslettersEventsAudioMIT Technology ReviewFeaturedTopicsNewslettersEventsAudioBiotechnology and healthHere’s why some people choose cryonics to store their bodies and brains after deathCryonic preservation is pricey and might never work. Some people think it’s worth it anyway.
By Jessica Hamzelouarchive pageMarch 27, 2026Getty Images This week I reported on some rather unusual research that focuses on the brain of L. Stephen Coles. Coles was a gerontologist who died from pancreatic cancer in 2014. He had spent the latter part of his career specializing in human longevity. And before he died, he decided to have his brain preserved by a cryonics facility. Today, it’s being stored at −146 °C at a center in Arizona, where it sits covered in a thin layer of frost. Related StoryThis scientist rewarmed and studied pieces of his friend’s cryopreserved brainRead next Coles also tasked his longtime friend Greg Fahy with studying pieces of his brain to see how they had fared (partly because he was worried his brain might crack). Fahy, a renowned cryobiologist, has found that the brain is “astonishingly well preserved.” But that doesn’t mean Coles could be reanimated. Over the past few years, I’ve spoken to people who run cryonics facilities, study cryopreservation, or just want to be cryogenically stored. All those I’ve spoken to acknowledge that the chance they’ll one day be brought back to life is vanishingly small. So why do they do it?
The first person to be cryonically preserved was James Hiram Bedford, a retired psychology professor who died of kidney cancer in 1967. Affiliates of the Cryonics Society of California, an organization headed by a charming TV repairman with no scientific or medical training, perfused his body with cryoproctective chemicals to protect against harmful ice formation and “quick-froze” him. Today, Bedford’s body is still in storage at Alcor, a cryonics facility based in Scottsdale, Arizona. It’s one of a handful of organizations that offer to collect, preserve, and store a person’s whole body or just their brain—pretty much indefinitely. It’s where Coles’s brain is stored.
Both men died from cancer. Medicine could not cure them. But in the future, who knows? One of the premises of cryonics is that modern medicine will continue to advance over time. Cancer death rates have declined significantly in the US since the early 1990s. I don’t know what exactly drove Coles and Bedford to their decisions, but they might have hoped to be reanimated at some point in the future when their cancers became curable. Related StoryMeet the Vitalists: the hardcore longevity enthusiasts who believe death is “wrong”Read next Others simply don’t want to die, period. Last year, I attended Vitalist Bay, a gathering for people who believe that life is good and that death is “humanity’s core problem.” Emil Kendziorra, CEO of the cryonics organization Tomorrow.Bio, spoke at the event, and a healthy interest in cryonics was obvious among the attendees. Many of them believe that science will find a way to “obviate” aging. And some were keen on the idea of being preserved until that happens. Think of it as a way to cheat not only death but aging itself. This sentiment might have support beyond the realms of Vitalist Bay, according to research by Kendziorra and his colleagues. In 2021, they surveyed 1,478 US-based internet users who were recruited via Craigslist. They found that men were more aware of cryonics than women, and more optimistic about its outcomes. Just over a third of the men who completed the survey expressed interest “a desire to live indefinitely.” Still, cryonics is a niche field. Worldwide, only around 5,000 or 6,000 people have signed up for cryopreservation when they die, Kendziorra told me when we chatted at Vitalist Bay. He also told me that his company gets between 20 and 50 new signups every month. And there are plenty of reasons why people don’t do it. A small fraction of the people who responded to Kendziorra’s survey said that they thought the idea of cryonics was dystopian, and some even said it should be illegal. Related StoryA startup is pitching a mind-uploading service that is “100 percent fatal”Read nextThen there’s the cost. Alcor charges $80,000 to store a person’s brain, and around $220,000 to store a whole body. Tomorrow.Bio’s charges are slightly higher. Many people, including Kendziorra himself, opt to cover this cost via a life insurance policy. Perhaps the main reason people don’t opt for cryonic preservation is that we don’t have any way to bring people back. Bedford has been in storage for more than 50 years, Coles for more than a decade. All the scientists I’ve spoken to say the likelihood of reanimating remains like theirs is vanishingly small.

The fact that the possibility—however tiny—is above zero is enough for some, including Nick Llewellyn, the director of research and development at Alcor. As a scientist, he says, he acknowledges that the chances reanimation will actually work are “pretty low.” Still, he’s interested in seeing what the future will look like, so he has signed himself up for the cryonic preservation of his brain. But Shannon Tessier, a cryobiologist at Massachusetts General Hospital, tells me that she wouldn’t sign up for cryonic preservation even if it worked. “It turns into a philosophical question,” she says. “Do I want to be revived hundreds of years later when my family is gone and life is different?” she asks. “There are so many complicated philosophical, societal, [and] legal complications that need to be thought through.” This article first appeared in The Checkup, MIT Technology Review’s weekly biotech newsletter. To receive it in your inbox every Thursday, and read articles like this first, sign up here. by Jessica HamzelouShareShare story on linkedinShare story on facebookShare story on emailPopularA “QuitGPT” campaign is urging people to cancel their ChatGPT subscriptionsMichelle KimMoltbook was peak AI theaterWill Douglas HeavenHow Pokémon Go is giving delivery robots an inch-perfect view of the worldWill Douglas HeavenOpenAI is throwing everything into building a fully automated researcherWill Douglas HeavenDeep DiveBiotechnology and healthMeet the Vitalists: the hardcore longevity enthusiasts who believe death is “wrong”They argue we need a revolution—and more and more influential scientists, funders, and politicians are taking them seriously.
By Jessica Hamzelouarchive pagePeptides are everywhere. Here’s what you need to know.The compounds have exploded in popularity, but big questions about safety and effectiveness are still unresolved.
By Cassandra Willyardarchive pageThis scientist rewarmed and studied pieces of his friend’s cryopreserved brainA gerontologist wanted his preserved brain to be reanimated. Cryopreservation is more likely to be used on organs for transplantation.
By Jessica Hamzelouarchive pageAn experimental surgery is helping cancer survivors give birthAt least eight babies have been born to patients who underwent the procedure.
By Jessica Hamzelouarchive pageStay connectedIllustration by Rose WongGet the latest updates fromMIT Technology ReviewDiscover special offers, top stories,
upcoming events, and more.Enter your emailPrivacy PolicyThank you for submitting your email!Explore more newslettersIt looks like something went wrong.
We’re having trouble saving your preferences.
Try refreshing this page and updating them one
more time. If you continue to get this message,
reach out to us at
customer-service@technologyreview.com with a list of newsletters you’d like to receive.The latest iteration of a legacyFounded at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1899, MIT Technology Review is a world-renowned, independent media company whose insight, analysis, reviews, interviews and live events explain the newest technologies and their commercial, social and political impact.READ ABOUT OUR HISTORYAdvertise with MIT Technology ReviewElevate your brand to the forefront of conversation around emerging technologies that are radically transforming business. From event sponsorships to custom content to visually arresting video storytelling, advertising with MIT Technology Review creates opportunities for your brand to resonate with an unmatched audience of technology and business elite.ADVERTISE WITH US© 2026 MIT Technology ReviewAboutAbout usCareersCustom contentAdvertise with usInternational EditionsRepublishingMIT Alumni NewsHelpHelp & FAQMy subscriptionEditorial guidelinesPrivacy policyTerms of ServiceWrite for usContact uslinkedin opens in a new windowinstagram opens in a new windowreddit opens in a new windowfacebook opens in a new windowrss opens in a new window

Here’s a summary of the MIT Technology Review article “Here’s why some people choose cryonics to store their bodies and brains after death”:

The article explores the growing, yet largely niche, practice of cryonics—the preservation of human bodies or brains at extremely low temperatures with the hope of future revival. It details the motivations and considerations behind this unusual approach to death. The piece begins by examining the case of L. Stephen Coles, a gerontologist who chose to have his brain cryopreserved shortly before his death from pancreatic cancer, and Greg Fahy’s subsequent efforts to study the preserved tissue. Fahy’s findings, while demonstrating a remarkable degree of preservation, do not guarantee the possibility of future reanimation.

The article traces the origins of cryonics back to 1967 with James Hiram Bedford, a retired psychology professor who became the first person to be cryopreserved. Since then, a handful of organizations, such as Alcor and Tomorrow.Bio, have offered cryopreservation services, storing bodies or brains indefinitely. These facilities primarily operate on the premise that advances in medical technology may one day allow for the revival of cryopreserved individuals.

Motivations for choosing cryonics are varied. Some individuals, like Coles and Bedford, likely hoped to be revived in the future when treatments for their cancers would be available. Others, represented by groups like Vitalist Bay, are driven by a fundamental desire to avoid death altogether, viewing aging as a primary problem to be solved. Research indicates a higher interest in cryonics among men, particularly those optimistic about future technological advancements.

Despite this interest, the field remains small, with approximately 5,000-6,000 individuals globally having undergone cryopreservation. Concerns exist regarding the practical feasibility of revival, acknowledging that the chances are currently extremely low. Shannon Tessier, a cryobiologist, highlights the philosophical questions presented: is revival desirable, even if possible, considering potential changes in society and personal relationships?

The cost of cryopreservation is a significant barrier, with options ranging from $80,000 for a brain to $220,000 for a whole body, often covered by life insurance policies. Nick Llewellyn, director of research and development at Alcor, acknowledges the low probability of success but continues to pursue the possibility, while Shannon Tessier remains skeptical, noting the potential for complex ethical and societal considerations.

The article concludes by emphasizing the current limitations of cryonics, largely centered around the lack of a proven pathway to revival. It underscores the philosophical and practical challenges associated with this technology, highlighting the debate about whether pursuing a vanishingly small chance of future life is a worthwhile endeavor. Ultimately, the article examines the diverse motivations and concerns surrounding cryonics, reflecting a blend of scientific curiosity, philosophical speculation, and a deep yearning to transcend the limitations of mortality.