The other half of the research
Researched and not recommended
Documented so nobody spends money finding out the hard way. Some of these are ideas we liked — they are here because the reasoning against them turned out to be stronger.
Egg or sperm preservationnot feasible outside a genuine fertility context. Retrieval runs $10,000–15,000 plus storage and needs two to three weeks of hormone stimulation beforehand, which a seriously ill patient generally cannot undergo. Posthumous retrieval requires specific prior written consent and a specialist on standby. There is no home method — oocytes die almost immediately without liquid nitrogen and cryoprotectants. Do instead: items 1, 2, 3 or 5. If the goal is preserving your genetics rather than producing a child, banked DNA achieves it for a fraction of the cost.
Freezing DNA in a home freezeractively worse than a cupboard. Frost-free freezers run defrost cycles, and freeze-thaw shears DNA strands. Real cryogenic storage needs below about −65°C.
Sealing hair bulbs in resin or waxobstructs the extraction a lab has to perform and traps moisture against the sample.
Plastic bags for biological samplesplastic traps moisture, moisture grows mold, mold destroys DNA. The most common and most destructive storage mistake. Do instead: paper, air-dried completely, in a cool dry interior closet. Not silica — the kit ships none (D55), and desiccant does nothing lasting in an unsealed envelope anyway. If the house is genuinely humid, the answer is the capsule (item 1), which is sealed and carries its own desiccator.
PVC sheet protectorsthe cheap sleeves with a vinyl smell outgas plasticizers that lift ink off paper over time. Do instead: sleeves marked polypropylene or "archival safe", or acid-free tissue.
Cryonicsmembership fees, substantial ongoing costs, and total dependence on an organization outliving you indefinitely. A fundamentally different proposition from preserving keepsakes and a genetic sample, resting on outcomes nobody can currently deliver. Our position: preserving DNA has real, present-day value — genealogical, identificatory, and as a hereditary-risk reference. Beyond that, the honest statement is that we don't know what the future might bring, and we won't dress speculation up as a reason to buy.
A consumer ancestry test as a preservation methodfine on its own terms, but most services run their analysis and then discard the physical sample, keeping only the data. If you want a sample your descendants can retest with better technology, these don't give you one. Do instead: item 1, and confirm the service returns the sample.
Ashes as a genetic samplenot preference but physics. Cremation destroys nuclear DNA. Any plan that treats ashes as the genetic component has no genetic component.
Using the inkless fingerprint reagent on lipsproposed as a way to bring the cut lip print (item 12) back without the balm, and it does solve the objection that actually killed it: an inkless print carries no oil to migrate into paper. Every other objection survives, and a new one arrives.
If you think one of these is wrong, say so. Several of them were reversed once already.