Brain Preservation is Now Mainstream
Posted: Mon May 25, 2026 8:06 am
We have finally arrived at a point in history where the idea of brain preservation and memory reconstruction is mainstream accepted science. Both the phase 1 preservation and the phase 2 reconstruction of the connectome are already widespread in mainstream labs. There is broad consensus that memory retrieval and full brain emulation will be possible. The one tiny piece that we're still missing is that most mainstream scientists will not call it "revival", but something else that is less emotionally loaded like memory reconstruction or whole brain emulation. But other than that one little nuance, we are now fully mainstream. This is making it easier to describe what we do on our website because I no longer have to justify being against the mainstream. I've always had a big problem with that. So now our claims of revival are just a tiny little leap from the well accepted position that memory retrieval and emulation are on the way.
Unfortunately, if we also claim that biological revival is possible, we will have a bit more of a challenge. That technology is quite a bit further out, so mainstream scientists will all push back on that because they lack imagination. That's a little bit unfortunate from a marketing perspective because that's what much of the naive general public clearly wants. So while our technique is clearly also the best technique for biological revival, just mentioning biological revival will tend to cause mainstream scientists to tune out. I think we will continue to be crystal clear that our technique is far superior to cryopreservation for biological revival, but I also think we should tone down the number of references to it in our marketing. We can't give people exactly what we think they want, but we can give them a heavy dose of the truth. In doing so, we might just be surprised by the number of people who don't actually need the emotional crutch of biological revival. And we will also be positioned for the time when even the word revival has mainstream acceptance. At that point, the vast majority of our customers will not be interested in biological revival. I think pursuing biological revival customers now could be a fool's errand. Arguing with them is just exhausting.
Unfortunately, if we also claim that biological revival is possible, we will have a bit more of a challenge. That technology is quite a bit further out, so mainstream scientists will all push back on that because they lack imagination. That's a little bit unfortunate from a marketing perspective because that's what much of the naive general public clearly wants. So while our technique is clearly also the best technique for biological revival, just mentioning biological revival will tend to cause mainstream scientists to tune out. I think we will continue to be crystal clear that our technique is far superior to cryopreservation for biological revival, but I also think we should tone down the number of references to it in our marketing. We can't give people exactly what we think they want, but we can give them a heavy dose of the truth. In doing so, we might just be surprised by the number of people who don't actually need the emotional crutch of biological revival. And we will also be positioned for the time when even the word revival has mainstream acceptance. At that point, the vast majority of our customers will not be interested in biological revival. I think pursuing biological revival customers now could be a fool's errand. Arguing with them is just exhausting.