P*I
2 楼
先上个图
a*e
3 楼
自从跳了丫电视，这就成心病了
g*n
4 楼
I speculated, yesterday, how they picked NTCP as a candidate receptor for
HBV. There is nothing wrong to select a candidate based on knowledge. The
key is to determine whether that is the one you are looking for with
evidence. Let’s see how they tested whether NTCP is the receptor for HBV.
(1) They transfected NTCP into cells, cross-linked the viral proteins,
and ran Western. Again, overexpression, forced linking, all are too
artificial. They should look at the native NTCP protein, but they never did.
Funny thing is: this is an almost a repeat of the first experiment. How did
they think that this could add something meaningful on top of the first
experiment?
(2) They transfected NTCP-GFP into cells, cross-linked red-fluorescence-
labeled c viral proteins, and observed their co-localization in the cells.
Who, on earth, thinks that this is way to show protein-protein interaction??
!! You transfect the cells green and force-link red to the cells. They
surely are present in the same cells. This is no brainer. Does that mean
that they interact with zero distance? Give me a break.
Also, they seemed to have no clue what this method does. They show images of
low magnification. Why? This is not a quantitative assay. How many cells
are lit up does not matter. You should look at the cells as close as
possible to see subcellular localization of the staining. Even you use high
power objectives, the regular fluorescent microscopy is the wrong way to go.
You need a confocal microscope to scan the cell to make sure that the
signals are in the membrane. Even you see them in the membrane, it does not
indicate that the proteins interact. The bottom line is that this is a wrong
method to answer the question. How come those PhDs did not understand the
methodology!!
When I look at those pictures, I feel like an audience watching a lousy
magic show. You know it's fake and you know the tricks, but they go on
performing anyway.
(3) They knocked down NTCP in cells using siRNA and assessed viral
infection and propagation. They show that the level of NTCP mRMA is
decreased by siRNA. Who cares about the mRNA? The level of NTCP protein is
what matters in this case. There is no guarantee that lower mRNA level
results in lower protein level. However, they never show what happened to
the protein of NTCP. This just takes a couple of runs of Western blotting.
Why not did it?
(4) Even NTCP siRNA affected HBV infection and propagation, as shown in
the paper, it does not mean that NTCP is the receptor. It just simply means
that the siRNA changes cellular conditions, which, in turn, influence viral
propagation. It does even not suggest that NTCP is directly associated with
the viruses.
Do I have to complete the rest of the paper? I rather go to watch Youtube to
kill time.
If this a showcase of China’s science from the showcase Institute, I feel
sorry for the taxpayers.
HBV. There is nothing wrong to select a candidate based on knowledge. The
key is to determine whether that is the one you are looking for with
evidence. Let’s see how they tested whether NTCP is the receptor for HBV.
(1) They transfected NTCP into cells, cross-linked the viral proteins,
and ran Western. Again, overexpression, forced linking, all are too
artificial. They should look at the native NTCP protein, but they never did.
Funny thing is: this is an almost a repeat of the first experiment. How did
they think that this could add something meaningful on top of the first
experiment?
(2) They transfected NTCP-GFP into cells, cross-linked red-fluorescence-
labeled c viral proteins, and observed their co-localization in the cells.
Who, on earth, thinks that this is way to show protein-protein interaction??
!! You transfect the cells green and force-link red to the cells. They
surely are present in the same cells. This is no brainer. Does that mean
that they interact with zero distance? Give me a break.
Also, they seemed to have no clue what this method does. They show images of
low magnification. Why? This is not a quantitative assay. How many cells
are lit up does not matter. You should look at the cells as close as
possible to see subcellular localization of the staining. Even you use high
power objectives, the regular fluorescent microscopy is the wrong way to go.
You need a confocal microscope to scan the cell to make sure that the
signals are in the membrane. Even you see them in the membrane, it does not
indicate that the proteins interact. The bottom line is that this is a wrong
method to answer the question. How come those PhDs did not understand the
methodology!!
When I look at those pictures, I feel like an audience watching a lousy
magic show. You know it's fake and you know the tricks, but they go on
performing anyway.
(3) They knocked down NTCP in cells using siRNA and assessed viral
infection and propagation. They show that the level of NTCP mRMA is
decreased by siRNA. Who cares about the mRNA? The level of NTCP protein is
what matters in this case. There is no guarantee that lower mRNA level
results in lower protein level. However, they never show what happened to
the protein of NTCP. This just takes a couple of runs of Western blotting.
Why not did it?
(4) Even NTCP siRNA affected HBV infection and propagation, as shown in
the paper, it does not mean that NTCP is the receptor. It just simply means
that the siRNA changes cellular conditions, which, in turn, influence viral
propagation. It does even not suggest that NTCP is directly associated with
the viruses.
Do I have to complete the rest of the paper? I rather go to watch Youtube to
kill time.
If this a showcase of China’s science from the showcase Institute, I feel
sorry for the taxpayers.
F*Y
5 楼
哇~
P*I
6 楼
种了快一年了，最近第一次开花，曾经几度快要死掉，最终都缓过来了
i*l
7 楼
bso
w*r
8 楼
这都什么乱七八糟的，兄弟咱改行干别的行不
did.
did
【在 g*****n 的大作中提到】
: I speculated, yesterday, how they picked NTCP as a candidate receptor for
: HBV. There is nothing wrong to select a candidate based on knowledge. The
: key is to determine whether that is the one you are looking for with
: evidence. Let’s see how they tested whether NTCP is the receptor for HBV.
: (1) They transfected NTCP into cells, cross-linked the viral proteins,
: and ran Western. Again, overexpression, forced linking, all are too
: artificial. They should look at the native NTCP protein, but they never did.
: Funny thing is: this is an almost a repeat of the first experiment. How did
: they think that this could add something meaningful on top of the first
: experiment?
did.
did
【在 g*****n 的大作中提到】
: I speculated, yesterday, how they picked NTCP as a candidate receptor for
: HBV. There is nothing wrong to select a candidate based on knowledge. The
: key is to determine whether that is the one you are looking for with
: evidence. Let’s see how they tested whether NTCP is the receptor for HBV.
: (1) They transfected NTCP into cells, cross-linked the viral proteins,
: and ran Western. Again, overexpression, forced linking, all are too
: artificial. They should look at the native NTCP protein, but they never did.
: Funny thing is: this is an almost a repeat of the first experiment. How did
: they think that this could add something meaningful on top of the first
: experiment?
g*n
9 楼
好牛
T*m
10 楼
好茂盛啊！
【在 P**I 的大作中提到】
: 先上个图
【在 P**I 的大作中提到】
: 先上个图
a*1
11 楼
Dell monitor不错
n*y
12 楼
我觉得LZ的再读是非常丰富详细系统的技术细节讨论---对很多读者,内行和外行都是科
普读物.另外maggieklean 的有关病毒传染机制的讨论也从大的机制方向上给了很好的
科普.
LZ和maggieklean (还有本WSN)的用词很尖刻,但是绝对不是上来就否定WNEHUI的一切,
而是从具体科学上讨论.
这里是中国人自己的BBS,我不认为这样的讨论是诽谤和恶毒攻击.
铁牛的IFs则是从参与WENHUI文章的研究人员的TRACK RECORD上来反驳具体详细的质疑-
--好象我们是在做人身攻击.
我对RY的评论还算是人身攻击,但是对于这WENHUI文章科学的讨论仅仅是学习.
普读物.另外maggieklean 的有关病毒传染机制的讨论也从大的机制方向上给了很好的
科普.
LZ和maggieklean (还有本WSN)的用词很尖刻,但是绝对不是上来就否定WNEHUI的一切,
而是从具体科学上讨论.
这里是中国人自己的BBS,我不认为这样的讨论是诽谤和恶毒攻击.
铁牛的IFs则是从参与WENHUI文章的研究人员的TRACK RECORD上来反驳具体详细的质疑-
--好象我们是在做人身攻击.
我对RY的评论还算是人身攻击,但是对于这WENHUI文章科学的讨论仅仅是学习.
h*r
13 楼
酷
P*I
14 楼
这货对光照要求很高，不能暗，也不能曝晒，至今我也没有摸透。只是在外面一直养着。
一个月前她因为开花养分不足，黄叶很厉害，险些挂掉。
我死马当活马医，用给西红柿黄瓜浇灌的plant food，居然很快缓过来了。
现在花开的很好
一个月前她因为开花养分不足，黄叶很厉害，险些挂掉。
我死马当活马医，用给西红柿黄瓜浇灌的plant food，居然很快缓过来了。
现在花开的很好
a*e
15 楼
这不是没deal不爽么？
【在 a******1 的大作中提到】
: Dell monitor不错
【在 a******1 的大作中提到】
: Dell monitor不错
g*n
16 楼
没有证明NTCP是HVB的受体，那基本上就全盘否定了。
j*c
17 楼
我们家附近有一家哈
P*I
18 楼
是啊，很难想象一个月前快要挂掉
【在 T*******m 的大作中提到】
: 好茂盛啊！
【在 T*******m 的大作中提到】
: 好茂盛啊！
a*1
19 楼
这个GC应该不过期吧？
f*s
20 楼
还需要酸性的土壤
着。
【在 P**I 的大作中提到】
: 这货对光照要求很高，不能暗，也不能曝晒，至今我也没有摸透。只是在外面一直养着。
: 一个月前她因为开花养分不足，黄叶很厉害，险些挂掉。
: 我死马当活马医，用给西红柿黄瓜浇灌的plant food，居然很快缓过来了。
: 现在花开的很好
着。
【在 P**I 的大作中提到】
: 这货对光照要求很高，不能暗，也不能曝晒，至今我也没有摸透。只是在外面一直养着。
: 一个月前她因为开花养分不足，黄叶很厉害，险些挂掉。
: 我死马当活马医，用给西红柿黄瓜浇灌的plant food，居然很快缓过来了。
: 现在花开的很好
w*x
21 楼
我有300也不知道跳什么，实在找不出来就在过期前跳几块硬盘算了...
b*h
22 楼
很不错！
【在 P**I 的大作中提到】
: 先上个图
【在 P**I 的大作中提到】
: 先上个图
i*o
23 楼
上酸肥啊，我用柠檬沤的酸肥就挺好，花白叶绿
P*I
24 楼
how how howhowhow??
【在 i****o 的大作中提到】
: 上酸肥啊，我用柠檬沤的酸肥就挺好，花白叶绿
【在 i****o 的大作中提到】
: 上酸肥啊，我用柠檬沤的酸肥就挺好，花白叶绿
相关阅读
带刻度的玻璃capillary?问个做Figure标注基因型的问题拿到第一个博后offer了，上来报个信请问pBlast和Blastp什么区别啊need 5 paperspaper help please 6 baozi请教：如何从胰腺导管细胞体外分化成ILC（胰岛样细胞簇）老板亲自帮我搞定绿卡推荐信--代表他对我很好吗?求有莹光标记的大肠杆菌和沙门氏菌R03值得申请吗？Sounds good的言外之意问一个SD值大于Ave的问题有没有人用powerpoint 作paper figures?Paper help!!求TurboTEV plasmid搞个暑期转基因普及活动吧！Paper download helpanyone going to McKinsey Insight Healthcare program this June?请问clustalW2怎么修改每行显示aa数目发现一个现象，不知道是否个例