4 ms·
Nope. Just awful science journalism as usual. That 75% number comes from the first sentence of the paper [1] introduction: > MYC is a critical transcription fa
by throwup238 3y ago
Nope. Just awful science journalism as usual. That 75% number comes from the first sentence of the paper [1] introduction:
> MYC is a critical transcription factor whose aberrant activity is implicated in more than 75% of all human cancer cases.
The rest is just made up vaguely based on the abstract.
[1] https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/jacs.3c09615 https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/jacs.3c09615
- aardvarkr 3y agoSounds like a pretty big deal to me, in the sense that defeating cancer requires a long chain of breakthroughs just like this. MYC-focused drugs might prove to be a promising way to interfere with the growth of tumors and have a real impact on people’s lives
- mmmpetrichor 3y agoIt's a technical achievement, and the headline reads like a breakthrough. I completely understand why people's trust has eroded in media, and especially in science.
- epistasis 3y agoThe headline is an accurate reflection of the body of the article. It's been a while since I worked in cancer, but being able to target MYC is a significant achievement, as it has generally been quite difficult to target transcription factors like MYC. Nothing in the article seems vaguely or concretely "made up" to me, but I'm curious if you can point to some particular sentences that you think are made up.