So AFAIKT, this study shows that many cancer treatments in trial do not really treat the assumed mechanism of action. Can you help us understand (for people who don’t fully grasp this part of science) how it is that so many of these false positives arise?
-
-
-
Obviously, CRISPR based elimination of the underlying proposed genetic form of action shows that the original proposal for therapy is wrong. My question: these scientists who don’t use this control still had SOME basis of their conclusion. Why?
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Someone should CRISPR some CNNs
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
How much of this is "those stupid scientists"? And how much is - we need to do this fundamental work BEFORE we can usefully design drugs - but PEOPLE ARE DYING!!! How can you talk about fundamentals? You'll get money --- for drug development. ...
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
seems important for cancer, but also drug discovery in general, and molecular biology in general, and even science in general.
Do the dratted control experiments! They are tedious... and tell you that you are wrong.