This
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.https://twitter.com/JSheltzer/status/1171850294910750721 …
-
-
Replying to @Meaningness
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?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @krowney @Meaningness
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?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @krowney
Presumably, they first found molecules that bound the target, then found that some of those also killed cancer cells, and assumed that they killed cancer cells *because* they bound the target. (Am on phone so can’t easily check whether OP gives an explanation.)
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like
Going through the paper again, they additionally found that many of the target proteins didn’t have the role in cancer that had been believed. The mistaken beliefs were due to nonspecific RNA inhibition: RNAs constructed to inhibit the target also inhibited the real culprit.
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.