{"title":"The politics of suspension suspended: the curious case of a cryopreserved cell product","authors":"Ruzana Liburkina","doi":"10.1057/s41292-024-00328-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Following recent discussions around suspended life, this paper focuses on an endeavor that sought to arrest biological material in time and space and render it available on demand. It depicts the attempt to establish a collection of cryopreserved donated cells. The study offers rare insights into how this initiative was at odds with familiar politics significant in its field, those of innovation and preparedness, and therefore was suspended itself. In identifying parallels with accounts of unsuccessful biobanks, the paper makes a case for the analytical value of considering ill-fated projects of suspension along with those that prosper and attract public attention. The case of a novel cryo-collection, in particular, demonstrates how the idea and practice of suspension only gathers political momentum when it serves other well-established rationales. As such, it prompts two important conclusions. First, the power to arrest life as it comes with cryotechnologies is much more likely to unravel in entrenched constellations than to carry transformative or disruptive potential. Second, however, the paper also exemplifies that projects of suspension are not necessarily doomed to serve hegemonic ways of governing life. It advocates for preventing such mismatches from falling into oblivion.</p>","PeriodicalId":46976,"journal":{"name":"Biosocieties","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biosocieties","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41292-024-00328-z","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Following recent discussions around suspended life, this paper focuses on an endeavor that sought to arrest biological material in time and space and render it available on demand. It depicts the attempt to establish a collection of cryopreserved donated cells. The study offers rare insights into how this initiative was at odds with familiar politics significant in its field, those of innovation and preparedness, and therefore was suspended itself. In identifying parallels with accounts of unsuccessful biobanks, the paper makes a case for the analytical value of considering ill-fated projects of suspension along with those that prosper and attract public attention. The case of a novel cryo-collection, in particular, demonstrates how the idea and practice of suspension only gathers political momentum when it serves other well-established rationales. As such, it prompts two important conclusions. First, the power to arrest life as it comes with cryotechnologies is much more likely to unravel in entrenched constellations than to carry transformative or disruptive potential. Second, however, the paper also exemplifies that projects of suspension are not necessarily doomed to serve hegemonic ways of governing life. It advocates for preventing such mismatches from falling into oblivion.
期刊介绍:
BioSocieties is committed to the scholarly exploration of the crucial social, ethical and policy implications of developments in the life sciences and biomedicine. These developments are increasing our ability to control our own biology; enabling us to create novel life forms; changing our ideas of ‘normality’ and ‘abnormality’; transforming our understanding of personal identity, family relations, ancestry and ‘race’; altering our social and personal expectations and responsibilities; reshaping global economic opportunities and inequalities; creating new global security challenges; and generating new social, ethical, legal and regulatory dilemmas. To address these dilemmas requires us to break out from narrow disciplinary boundaries within the social sciences and humanities, and between these disciplines and the natural sciences, and to develop new ways of thinking about the relations between biology and sociality and between the life sciences and society.
BioSocieties provides a crucial forum where the most rigorous social research and critical analysis of these issues can intersect with the work of leading scientists, social researchers, clinicians, regulators and other stakeholders. BioSocieties defines the key intellectual issues at the science-society interface, and offers pathways to the resolution of the critical local, national and global socio-political challenges that arise from scientific and biomedical advances.
As the first journal of its kind, BioSocieties publishes scholarship across the social science disciplines, and represents a lively and balanced array of perspectives on controversial issues. In its inaugural year BioSocieties demonstrated the constructive potential of interdisciplinary dialogue and debate across the social and natural sciences. We are becoming the journal of choice not only for social scientists, but also for life scientists interested in the larger social, ethical and policy implications of their work. The journal is international in scope, spanning research and developments in all corners of the globe.
BioSocieties is published quarterly, with occasional themed issues that highlight some of the critical questions and problematics of modern biotechnologies. Articles, response pieces, review essays, and self-standing editorial pieces by social and life scientists form a regular part of the journal.