3 ms·
I don't think this is a controversial statement at all. Any CRISPR-Cas9 paper published will at least discuss the prospect of undesired mutations; this is a wel
by ejstronge 8y ago
I don't think this is a controversial statement at all. Any CRISPR-Cas9 paper published will at least discuss the prospect of undesired mutations; this is a well-known concern.
You may be interested in my comment from the last time this journal article was posted to HN.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17544250 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17544250
- searine 8y agoSpeaking as a biologist. Among my colleagues, it is still very controversial. It should be noted that "controversial" scientifically means something different than in the general public. What I mean is that we see and believe the current observations but are still waiting to fully understand the extent and reproducibility.
- ejstronge 8y ago> Speaking as a biologist. Among my colleagues, it is still very controversial. I'm also a biologist. I guess I don't understand where your concern arises. I and others I know have used CRISPR-Cas9 to introduce arbitrary DNA mutations at loci of interest. We see many different types of lesions, ranging in size.
- searine 8y agoI shouldn't have brought credentials into this, its bad form on my part. But anyway, I was just relating what I've heard from colleagues and my dis-taste for the articles definitive title.