- News Home
6 March 2014 1:04 pm ,
Vol. 343 ,
Magdalena Koziol, a former postdoc at Yale University, was the victim of scientific sabotage. Now, she is suing the...
Antiretroviral drugs can protect people from becoming infected by HIV. But so-called pre-exposure prophylaxis, or PrEP...
Two studies show that eating a diet low in protein and high in carbohydrates is linked to a longer, healthier life, and...
Considered an icon of conservation science, researchers at World Wildlife Fund (WWF) headquarters in Washington, D.C.,...
The new atlas, which shows the distribution of important trace metals and other substances, is the first product of...
Early in April, the first of a fleet of environmental monitoring satellites will lift off from Europe's spaceport in...
Since 2000, U.S. government health research agencies have spent almost $1 billion on an effort to churn out thousands...
- 6 March 2014 1:04 pm , Vol. 343 , #6175
- About Us
Stem Cell Paper Retracted
14 October 2010 12:04 pm
Three stem cell scientists have retracted a paper they published early this year in Nature. Details are sketchy, but in the retraction, released today, they say that a "re-examination" of the paper "raised serious concerns."
In a series of experiments, the group joined the blood circulation of old and young mice, a method that's been used for decades in different kinds of studies, to test whether animals with a certain feature (youth, in this case) can impart it to others that don't have it. The authors, led by Amy Wagers at the Joslin Diabetes Center and Harvard Medical School in Boston, reported that the old mice did develop features of younger ones, in particular in the balance of different types of bone marrow cells. They traced this change to signals from certain bone-forming cells affecting blood stem cells from the young animals. A Harvard publication gives a nice summary of the work here.
The retraction specifies that three of the four authors have specifically lost confidence in the paper's findings about the role of these bone cells. They say that the first author, postdoc Shane Mayack, did not sign on to the retraction and maintains the results are still valid. The blog Retraction Watch has some more details.