i am not assuming, the claim is made very clearly multiple times through the article , and the WSJ article , has cherry picked the publication. there is no basi

i am not assuming, the claim is made very clearly multiple times through the article , and the WSJ article , has cherry picked the publication. there is no basis to the claim that 2 arginine codons adjacent to each other is a rare, engineered event, this [codon duplication]is a very common artefect of natural nucleotide repair mechanisms, also the article suffers from a deficiency of understanding, as the duplication of a lesion associated codon is also accompanied with a guide segment of nucleotide so the feature is more than just a duplicated codon. there is also the case of transversion and this has not been addressed, but could be illuminated with radio phosphorous labeling and restriction fragment analysis.