Gene therapy Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Biotech / Medical : Gene therapy

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: poodle who wrote (46)	4/13/1999 2:11:00 PM
From: DNA-Jock	Read Replies (1) of 319

poodle wrote: "Kmiec's paper in Science in 1996 was an event...[snip]... In 1997 two letters appeared as a response for the publication. They were critical. They asked for controls, controls and controls. One of the possible explanation they mentioned was contamination by wild type cells." Stasiak's objection to the paper is a knock-out punch. The _only_ reasonable explanation for their data is cross-contamination. While it would be nice if Kmiec & co-workers were able to show the generation of a piece of DNA that wasn't already floating around their lab (not done yet), I don't think their method will have any credibility until independently corroborated. In 2.5 years the silence has been impressive, and not for want of trying. Kmiec has founded a biotech to make use of this technology - I believe it is none other than Kimeragen. I'm not saying this method won't work, just exercise EXTREME caution before parting with any greenbacks. Andrzej Stasiak, Stephen C. West, Edward H. Egelman;, and Eric B. Kmiec; Science 1997 277: 459-463. (in Letters)

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next