Yeah, I really agree, it doesnt fully make sense to me. Maybe its not detrimental to the cell but ends up being a problem for the organ or something like that

Also I dont get why not just base edit the mutation causing the early stop

I think upon reading it more closely, the thing that i misunderstood was that even a very small rate of fixing the early stop proteins recovered function, maybe in this context it makes sense

We are doing similar experiments right now and our results are so different from all the things you would need to be true for any of this to make sense.

Yeah I mean or the ribosomes some how have other ways of filtering... but this is inconsistent, it really doesnt make sense in so many ways.

Also, if you point edit change some of the natural tRNA, it must be bad to lose those copies for normal case, and how can the dosing be even close to correct

I really dont understand how this sup-tRNA works, how can this possibly work as a therapy without extending natural proteins everywhere

Also the cells are sorted by growth rate so idk some meaning to the ordering

Yeah its not great, it just made comparisons of the different modalities a bit easier to visualize than when we plotted a scatter but will revisit. Thanks for feedback!

I have admittedly been on the non-PI side of this only to realize how true this must be after receiving a blank stare 😅

Trust me, its better than whatever harm "doing their jobs" will cause...

What about predictions that involve many proteins interacting together?

Yeah, for sure not true but also probably looking under the lamp post effect as well!

Once you have a certain level of aggregation, it does become hard to imagine removing it easily. What if the aggregate is too large to fit in a lysosome? I dont know I guess what the size scales are

What do you use to measure blood sugar?