There has been a geat deal of questioning about DNA

ESPECIALLY
SINCE
ONE CAN PRESERVE HIS OWN DNA IMMEDIATLY

As long as Genetics was dimly known, the feeling of heredity served as alibi for intellectuals or ideologies. But since we understand its processes and can influence its preservation, it becomes the sting for an astonishing burst of issues.

Is it dangerous to preserve the DNA? asks first the anxious mind

Let's enumerate the advantages,

1/ DNA knowledge and engineering can control and prevent diseases. It can be beneficial during one's lifetime. But the most important thing is that our present management of DNA extends its effects on future generations. This long term responsability can be held in two ways: a) in operating on the present living DNA or b) in preserving it for future operations.
Since our knowledge, security and technical skill will be higher in the future, it is to emphasize presently conservation.

2/ DNA's function in memory and interactivity makes its science most acurate for the knowledge of Ecology. Massive DNA records present towards Nature a correct compensation for the disruptions our development has caused so far.
A reset of Harmony in a future environment which will continue to refine its industry, will make great use of the conservation of the species' DNA - especially of humankind's, because of its complexity, its power and its individuality.

3/ There are many other advantages - breeding other planets is still Science Fiction, although we begin to consider that extraterrestrial fossile DNA may be found on earth. Spirituality and stimulation of our meditations, perception of Time, collective ecological awareness, equality between children and parents, may all take part in a needed shift of consciousness.

On the other hand there are disadvantages in preserving DNA :

Conservation of DNA can be seen as a political issue, as understanding population history, considering our legislations, our philosophy of freedom and self-knowledge... meanwhile avoiding conservation would signify lack of confidence and eventualy would arm preservation of life on Earth. Politics praise guilt and threat for it help to keep people quiet and intensify their work for a better future.

Indeed, if everyone could make millions of clone of him/herself and levy armies, or if someone could make something with somebody's else chromosomes, and moreover if conservation would throw off balance the poll harmony, serious ethical measures must be taken.

But there is nothing we can do, for powerful, wicked and rich enemies have already began to clone themselves. Some scientists refuse to do what their colleagues do - they are like Pilate, Lady Macbeth or Oedipus when he pined his eyes to stay blind.
Eventually, the worse disadvantage in conservation of DNA is much more hypothetical than conservation's benefits which are obvious. The reason why one would react to DNA's preservation with negativity is irrational - i.e. explainable by psychoanalysis. Such analysis unveils that, paradoxically, the horizon of a DNA's industry raises a narcissistic anxiety and secretly declares a loss of illusion.

This subtle issue resolves into one real practical ethical concern. DNA conservation can be personal (you rely on yourself and later on your heirs for the preservation) OR collective (you may entrust your DNA to a Governemental Agency, a University, a Privat Funeral Section, or other collective care - CYBEK helps DNA-groups maintenance, which allow a good reliability for independant and Ethical collective long term preservation.