>>12826583>is it trueThere is a serious possibility.
The methodology is rather sloppy, when the control experiments are done correctly CPE of equal strength can be seen in the negative control lines.
The definitions for, how to prove pathogenicity are getting weaker and weaker.
In silico methods are certainly making it worse, because you don’t know where something is from and the computer program invents the rest.
Purification ex vivo is never done.
On top of it we are learning more about antibody promiscuity.
>regarding consequencesIt could very well be the final nail in the coffin of wide spread use of in vitro methods. This discussion has been brewing, since at least twenty years.
Even 150 years ago many were convinced that looking at dead tissue tells you next to nothing about the organism and/or their interactions with other organisms in question.
While genetics has never really moved out of simple organisms and even there wasn’t that successful virology failing could mean the end of current conceptions of genetic technology. Unbeknownst to most there currently isn’t even a definiens to the term gene. The textbooks just tell you some old ones and say: Well there is some truth to all of them, but it’s much more complicated.
The truth about the off traget effects of CRISPR-Cas9 would also see the light of they day. The realization of the mistake will speed up the current process of a dogmatic change towards a more encompassing understanding of the genome as part of bigger and more complex mechanisms. Basically genetics is to close to escape the collapse.
It will probably start a reevaluation of all scientific disciplines. Scientists would go back to the basics and start looking into alternative explanations, look at the methodology and try to replicate old experiments. The medical profession would change drastically. Likely making them more independent from institutions and pharma. Probably control would be organized locally by citizens.
