We posted two years ago, the story of an Irish cat which after several years of veterinary treatment, was X rayed and found to have generalised skeletal tuberculosis. The cat was euthanised at seven years old.
Samples (plural) were taken from this cat, and the strain or spoligotype found to be Danish type 1331, uniquely used in badger vaccines. The paper explains:
PCR and the usual culture tests revealed m.bovis But the the spoligotype was revealed as Danish Strain 1331 used locally in badger vaccines. After another six months with no improvement, intermittent lameness and pain - and now a definite diagnosis of z Tuberculosis, this young cat was euthanised.
So, culture tests, PCR etc. and on several bits of this now very dead cat, all showed Danish 1331.
But roll forward two years and the authors have withdrawn their paper, citing their spoligotyping as 'unsafe', thus negating their conclusions.
"An error in the interpretation of the genomic sequence data and the fact that the isolate was not the BCG strain reported in the manuscript"
So what have we got here? A young cat, treated for three years and eventually found to have zoonotic tuberculosis, samples (plural) from which apparently all showed Danish type 1331? A peer reviewed result, and now it's not strain 1331? But no information as to exactly what the strain is. How very 'Irish'.
So has spoligotyping (DNA matches) become fashionably 'non-binary'?
DNA is binary. It's either a match or not. Yes or no, but not the milkman, as we were told. Not he/ she/ they/ them or whatever the chosen term is today.
But the 21st century has turned science on its head, and we now have non binary spoligotypes? Really?
No comments:
Post a Comment