Date: 10/05/2016 11:58:43
From: dv
ID: 887515
Subject: Arsenic DNA paper hoax

This is 3 years old but I did not see it at the time.
I confess, I wrote the Arsenic DNA paper to expose flaws in peer-review at subscription based journals – See more at: http://www.michaeleisen.org/blog/?p=1439#sthash.lU1YRyHx.dpuf


In 2011, after having read several really bad papers in the journal Science, I decided to explore just how slipshod their peer-review process is. I knew that their business depends on publishing “sexy” papers. So I created a manuscript that claimed something extraordinary – that I’d discovered a species of bacteria that uses arsenic in its DNA instead of phosphorus. But I made the science so egregiously bad that no competent peer reviewer would accept it. The approach was deeply flawed – there were poor or absent controls in every figure. I used ludicrously elaborate experiments where simple ones would have done. And I failed to include a simple, obvious experiment that would have definitively shown that arsenic was really in the bacteria’s DNA. I then submitted the paper to Science, punching up the impact the work would have on our understanding of extraterrestrials and the origins of life on Earth in the cover letter. And what do you know? They accepted it!

Reply Quote

Date: 10/05/2016 12:22:17
From: sibeen
ID: 887522
Subject: re: Arsenic DNA paper hoax

Nice article. I did have to laugh, there is one comment at the bottom:

“It is interesting to see the motivation behind the Arsenic DNA paper. Thank you for sharing.”

Which seems to indicate that the person making the comment didn’t understand what the article stated.

Reply Quote

Date: 10/05/2016 12:39:25
From: dv
ID: 887528
Subject: re: Arsenic DNA paper hoax

sibeen said:


Nice article. I did have to laugh, there is one comment at the bottom:

“It is interesting to see the motivation behind the Arsenic DNA paper. Thank you for sharing.”

Which seems to indicate that the person making the comment didn’t understand what the article stated.

ROFLyes and that is the only comment

Reply Quote

Date: 10/05/2016 12:44:01
From: dv
ID: 887530
Subject: re: Arsenic DNA paper hoax

For background here is an article in Nature that deals with some of the problems of the arsenic paper.
http://www.nature.com/news/arsenic-life-bacterium-prefers-phosphorus-after-all-1.11520

Reply Quote

Date: 10/05/2016 13:01:08
From: ChrispenEvan
ID: 887542
Subject: re: Arsenic DNA paper hoax

i remember this being news on the old sssf forum. or its postecessor.

Reply Quote

Date: 10/05/2016 21:17:06
From: mollwollfumble
ID: 887806
Subject: re: Arsenic DNA paper hoax

dv said:

For background here is an article in Nature that deals with some of the problems of the arsenic paper.
http://www.nature.com/news/arsenic-life-bacterium-prefers-phosphorus-after-all-1.11520


That’s not the same as a hoax. It’s not even a criticism of the original paper. The key factor for the origin of life and extraterrestrial life is that arsenic can substitute for phosphorus successfully within genetic material. It doesn’t matter a damn if it only happens one time in 4000, that’s still a heck of a lot of arsenic.

I’m not sure yet if it really was a hoax or whether the retraction is a hoax.

Reply Quote

Date: 10/05/2016 21:22:15
From: mollwollfumble
ID: 887808
Subject: re: Arsenic DNA paper hoax

From link in OP.

“OK – this isn’t exactly what happened. I didn’t actually write the paper.”

I.e. the retraction is a hoax.

Reply Quote

Date: 10/05/2016 23:17:01
From: dv
ID: 887849
Subject: re: Arsenic DNA paper hoax

mollwollfumble said:

I’m not sure yet if it really was a hoax or whether the retraction is a hoax.

The paper and the retraction are not hoaxes.

Reply Quote

Date: 11/05/2016 16:10:16
From: Cymek
ID: 888216
Subject: re: Arsenic DNA paper hoax

mollwollfumble said:


dv said:

For background here is an article in Nature that deals with some of the problems of the arsenic paper.
http://www.nature.com/news/arsenic-life-bacterium-prefers-phosphorus-after-all-1.11520


That’s not the same as a hoax. It’s not even a criticism of the original paper. The key factor for the origin of life and extraterrestrial life is that arsenic can substitute for phosphorus successfully within genetic material. It doesn’t matter a damn if it only happens one time in 4000, that’s still a heck of a lot of arsenic.

I’m not sure yet if it really was a hoax or whether the retraction is a hoax.

Is arsenic more widely available out there in the universe than phosphorus that extraterrestrial life would use it or is it just stating its another method life could be created

Reply Quote

Date: 11/05/2016 16:54:11
From: dv
ID: 888243
Subject: re: Arsenic DNA paper hoax

Cymek said:


mollwollfumble said:

dv said:

For background here is an article in Nature that deals with some of the problems of the arsenic paper.
http://www.nature.com/news/arsenic-life-bacterium-prefers-phosphorus-after-all-1.11520


That’s not the same as a hoax. It’s not even a criticism of the original paper. The key factor for the origin of life and extraterrestrial life is that arsenic can substitute for phosphorus successfully within genetic material. It doesn’t matter a damn if it only happens one time in 4000, that’s still a heck of a lot of arsenic.

I’m not sure yet if it really was a hoax or whether the retraction is a hoax.

Is arsenic more widely available out there in the universe than phosphorus that extraterrestrial life would use it or is it just stating its another method life could be created

Arsenic is just about one thousandth as abundant as phosphorus

Reply Quote