World’s Oldest Newborn: The San Luis Code

baby Born After 30 Years in Frozen State Sets New World Record

July 28, 2025 – In a landmark event pushing the boundaries of reproductive technology, a baby boy has been born after being frozen as an embryo for over three decades. Thaddeus Daniel Pierce arrived on July 26th, marking a new world record for the longest-ever frozen embryo successfully brought to term.

Lindsey and Tim Pierce, an Ohio couple, welcomed thaddeus after years of struggling with infertility. They chose to adopt the embryo, originally created in 1994 through in vitro fertilization (IVF).The embryo spent an astonishing 11,148 days frozen, surpassing all previous records.The story behind the embryo is as remarkable as its longevity. Linda Archerd,now 62,and her then-husband conceived four embryos via IVF in 1994. One resulted in the birth of their daughter, while the remaining three were frozen. Following a separation, Archerd retained legal custody of the embryos, diligently paying for their continued storage, hoping one day they might have a chance at life and remain connected to her family.

Archerd ultimately partnered with Nightlight Christian Adoptions, a specialized agency, to find a suitable couple aligned with her religious and geographical preferences. This led to the Pierces being selected to receive the embryos.

“We are beyond blessed,” Lindsey Pierce shared. “This is a dream come true, and we are so grateful to Linda for giving us the opportunity to become parents.”

The Rise of Embryo Adoption

This case highlights the growing trend of embryo adoption, a process gaining traction among individuals and couples who believe life begins at conception and wish to provide a chance for frozen embryos that might or else be discarded.IVF often results in the creation of more embryos than are immediately needed. These excess embryos are typically frozen for potential future use. However, not all embryos are ultimately used, leading to the ethical question of their fate. Embryo adoption offers a viable alternative, allowing hopeful parents to build families while giving these embryos the opportunity to develop.

Long-Term Implications & Future of Frozen Embryo Storage

The success of Thaddeus’s birth raises meaningful questions about the long-term viability of frozen embryos and the evolving landscape of reproductive technology. While freezing techniques have advanced significantly, the extended storage period in this case is remarkable.

Experts are now re-evaluating optimal storage durations and potential impacts on embryo health. This case also fuels the ongoing debate surrounding the ethical considerations of IVF,embryo storage,and the rights of both the biological creators and the adopting parents.

As embryo adoption becomes more prevalent, legal frameworks and support systems will need to adapt to address the unique challenges and opportunities presented by this increasingly common path to parenthood. The story of Thaddeus Daniel Pierce is not just a personal triumph, but a pivotal moment in the ongoing evolution of reproductive medicine.

What are the primary cost factors associated wiht implementing and maintaining an FC SAN compared to an IP SAN?

FC SAN vs. IP SAN: A Detailed Comparison (2025 Update)

Understanding Storage Area Networks (SANs)

Storage Area Networks (SANs) are dedicated,high-speed networks that provide block-level storage access to servers. They are crucial for applications demanding high performance and availability,like databases,virtualization,and video editing. Two primary types dominate the SAN landscape: Fibre Channel (FC) SAN and IP SAN. Choosing the right one depends heavily on your organization’s needs, budget, and future scalability plans.

Fibre Channel (FC) SAN: The Performance Leader

FC SANs have long been the gold standard for high-performance storage. Here’s a breakdown:

Technology: FC SANs utilize a specialized high-speed network based on Fibre Channel protocol. This requires dedicated Fibre Channel Host Bus Adapters (HBAs) in servers and Fibre channel switches to connect to storage arrays.

Performance: FC SANs deliver exceptional performance, currently reaching up to 32Gbps per port (as of 2025). This translates to low latency and high throughput, ideal for demanding workloads. Single-port performance can reach 8Gbps.

Reliability: FC sans are known for their robustness and reliability, offering features like redundant paths and error correction.

Cost: This performance comes at a price. FC SANs are significantly more expensive than IP SANs. The cost stems from:

Expensive Fibre Channel hbas.

High cost of Fibre Channel switches.

specialized expertise required for management.

IP SAN: Versatility and Cost-Effectiveness

IP SANs leverage existing IP networks to transport storage traffic. There are two main types:

iSCSI SAN

Technology: iSCSI (Internet Small Computer System Interface) encapsulates SCSI commands within IP packets and transmits them over standard Ethernet networks. This means you can utilize your existing network infrastructure.

Performance: iSCSI performance is generally lower than FC SAN, but has improved significantly with 10GbE, 25GbE, and faster Ethernet technologies. Performance is heavily dependent on network congestion and quality.

Cost: iSCSI is considerably more affordable than FC SAN. It utilizes standard Ethernet NICs and switches,reducing hardware costs.

Complexity: iSCSI can be more complex to configure and manage than FC SAN, notably regarding network security and performance tuning.

FC over IP

Technology: FC over IP (FCIP) tunnels Fibre Channel traffic over IP networks. It essentially allows you to extend your FC SAN across longer distances using IP infrastructure.

Performance: FCIP maintains the performance characteristics of Fibre Channel, as the underlying protocol remains unchanged.

Cost: FCIP is more expensive than iSCSI but less expensive than a full FC SAN deployment. It requires FCIP gateways and possibly specialized network equipment.

Use Cases: Commonly used for disaster recovery and remote replication, extending SAN connectivity between data centers.

FC SAN vs. IP SAN: A Side-by-Side Comparison

| feature | FC SAN | iSCSI SAN | FC over IP |

|——————-|————————–|————————–|————————-|

| Protocol | Fibre Channel | SCSI over IP | Fibre Channel over IP |

| Network | dedicated Fibre Channel | Existing IP Network | IP Network |

| Performance | Highest (up to 32Gbps) | Moderate (dependent on network) | High (FC performance) |

| Cost | Highest | Lowest | Moderate |

| Complexity | Moderate | High | moderate to High |

| Scalability | Excellent | Good | Good |

| Reliability | Excellent | Good | Excellent |

Which SAN is Right for You? (2025 Recommendations)

As of 2025, the “best” SAN depends on your specific requirements:

For Mission-Critical Applications & Highest Performance: FC SAN remains the preferred choice for applications demanding the absolute highest performance and lowest latency, such as high-frequency trading, large-scale databases, and high-resolution video editing. Though, carefully evaluate the total cost of