Are we ready to genetically modify a human embryo? Or is it too late to ask?
Kirstin R.W. Matthews; Ana S. Iltis · 2019 · Accountability in Research
WASTE classifies this as Abandoned Hypothesis · AI classification, approximate
A hypothesis was tested and not supported — a dead end worth knowing about before you pursue it.
Abstract (excerpt)
After the announcement that a scientist genetically altered human embryos and implanted them for gestation last November, the increased discussion has revolved around the ethical lapses that occurred in the process. The scientist, He…
Excerpt shown for reference under fair use — read the full paper at the publisher.
Hosted by the publisher — may require access.
About to run something similar?
Run an AI Precheck on your own design to catch failure modes like this one before you spend the time. Your first desk check is free.
Related failures
Power and Predictive Accuracy of Polygenic Risk Scores
Negative / Null Result ReportLocoregional Recurrence After Sentinel Lymph Node Dissection With or Without Axillary Dissection in Patients With Sentinel Lymph Node Metastases
Negative / Null Result ReportCritical aspects of using bacterial cell viability assays with the fluorophores SYTO9 and propidium iodide
Negative / Null Result ReportAlpelisib plus fulvestrant for PIK3CA-mutated, hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor-2–negative advanced breast cancer: final overall survival results from SOLAR-1
Negative / Null Result ReportA randomized placebo-controlled trial of idebenone in Leber’s hereditary optic neuropathy
Negative / Null Result ReportThe CAFA challenge reports improved protein function prediction and new functional annotations for hundreds of genes through experimental screens
WASTE indexes this work — it does not host or republish it. Failure-type classification is automated and approximate.
Metadata source: OpenAlex · DOI 10.1080/08989621.2019.1617139