Hacker News Reader

This is one side of a story of guy that had just been fired and is filing a lawsuit. What exactly is the criticism of the paper since the paper is available? If the only argument is the threshold to consider something a hit or not on the screen, there is a ton of followup in the paper looking at those genes more closely. Am I missing something?

View on HN

I don't understand why you've mentioned "on the screen".

If the treshold is set too low, we'll end up with false positives. I.e. we'll think the study shows something when in fact it doesn’t. And this is not something that can be fixed in follow-up papers.

It was a genome wide screen looking for synthetic lethality with another gene. As with all screens you get a bunch of hits and you follow up on the most promising ones, which they did in the paper.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com