SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
A disputed paper that raised questions about the safety of CRISPR has been retracted:
A scientific paper that purported to lay bare serious flaws in the gene-editing tool known as CRISPR and briefly tanked shares of genome-editing companies has been retracted by its publisher.
The paper [DOI: 10.1038/nmeth.4293] [DX], published last year in Nature Methods, claimed that CRISPR wreaked havoc on the genome, causing hundreds of unintended mutations in mice — and that the algorithms typically used to detect these changes were routinely missing them.
[...] Two months after publication of the paper, Nature Methods published an "an expression of concern" about the paper in July. The retraction notice, appended Friday, goes further, saying the authors did not use mice that had been bred in their own laboratory — so they could not know if any genetic mutations were the result of their intervention with CRISPR editing, or if it stemmed from variations in the mice's own genomes.
Nature Methods editorial discussing the retraction: CRISPR off-targets: a reassessment (open, DOI: 10.1038/nmeth.4664) (DX)
Previously: CRISPR Safer than Thought; Misleading Study Found Shared Mutations in Closely Related Mice
(Score: 1) by magamo on Thursday April 05 2018, @12:52AM (1 child)
The results have been validated by several labs across the world already. Toss a search for CRISPR in PubMed. In fact, I'll do it for ya! https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=CRISPR [nih.gov] I wonder how many of the 8,785 results effectively debunk this one erroneous study?
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Thursday April 05 2018, @03:05AM
Now now, be charitable.
The study said that the errors are often overlooked, and how many of those 8785 studies were looking for specific effects instead of errors?
Not saying that the outlier is right, I am saying that the specific criticisms they raised should be checked by some labs that have nothing to lose by replicating their results.
Most of the world regards CRISPR as "the way" to edit the human genome and remove genetic diseases... it's been around long enough, we should start putting some concrete numbers on how feasible that is, or isn't... regardless of whether the ethics committee thinks it's a good idea or not.
🌻🌻 [google.com]