I'm trying to fix Wikipedia's page about cryonics, which is currently infested by some religiously-motivated(?) editors pushing the page to be as negative as possible. Wikipedia functions on a model of citing what it considers to be "reliable sources", which means that for contentious subjects this turns into a war of "who can find the most sources that agree with them". As such, I need sources that present cryonics in a neutral or positive light, and meet Wikipedia's reliability guidelines. I'll award mana to any provided that are not already cited on Wikipedia.
1,000https://www.biostasis.com/scientists-open-letter-on-cryonics/
This is a letter signed by 78 graduate-degree scientists on the validity of cryonics.
Canatelli-Mallat, M., Lascaray, F., Entraigues-Abramson, M., Portiansky, E. L., Blamaceda, N., Morel, G. R., & Goya, R. G. (2020). Cryopreservation of a human brain and its experimental correlate in rats. Rejuvenation Research, 23(6), 516–525. https://doi.org/10.1089/rej.2019.2245
Ekpo, M. D., Boafo, G. F., Gambo, S. S., Hu, Y., Liu, X., Xie, J., & Tan, S. (2022). Cryopreservation of animals and cryonics: Current technical progress, difficulties and possible research directions. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 9, 877163. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2022.877163
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fvets.2022.877163/full