The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
The technology is exciting. Finding RNA and killing cells that possess it using CRISPR/Cas9. There are two main issues I see. One is that SARS-CoV-2 is a singable-stranded RNA virus and this tech requires a double strand. A: You will have transient double stranded RNA when it’s being copied or transcribed t this could be a limitation. The second is that delivery of genetic material to cells is not currently efficient and and less well studied in terms of safety.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.