• 1 Post
  • 60 Comments
Joined 3 days ago
cake
Cake day: March 17th, 2025

help-circle

  • That seems like a contradictory statement

    Also read this instances TOS and it is pretty lame. I have particular issue with no war footage. If you are in a democratic nation that is either in a war or funding a war you should see it’s results for what it is. War is ugly and hiding that is a great disservice to the world

    But I suppose the advantage of lemmy is I can simply find an instance not afraid to share those and still have access to this one














  • Having a heterozygous deletion is still effecting the right gene. Without knowing both of her parents genetics it’s hard to say if it was natural. What he did could produce either a heterozygous or homozygous result on the gene, but only the homozygous presentation is effective at prevention.

    So 1 was a full success and the other showed activation on the appropriate gene, but not enough to confer resistance. Although it is possible it does since he used an artificial gene. We know the natural one is not effective in a heterozygous presentation. I still think that was his greatest mistake. He should have just used the naturally effective gene.

    You do make a good point with the full backing rigor of the scientific method this procedure would always be successful.



  • Per the wikipedia page it states that it is not clear if it effective because they’re not going to intentionally infect the children to test it. But we see the results specifically on the targeted gene. That’s a success and demonstrates the technology works.

    I’d argue the folly was inserting an artificial gene as opposed to the natural gene that we already know works. Either way the technology showed expression on the correct gene, that is a success.

    We’d be having a better discourse on this if his results weren’t banned from every journal and not studied.