Science magazine Science withdraws publication after 15 years, scientists surprised

This article was last updated on July 29, 2025

Canada: Oye! Times readers Get FREE $30 to spend on Amazon, Walmart…
USA: Oye! Times readers Get FREE $30 to spend on Amazon, Walmart…

Science magazine Science withdraws publication after 15 years, scientists surprised

It seemed like a true revelation in 2010: in a Californian lake, bacteria were discovered that use toxic arsenic in their DNA – instead of phosphorus, like all the other life on earth. But fifteen years later, professional journal Science has the publication in which the discovery was shared withdrawn, to the astonishment of the discoverers and colleagues.

The discovery was widely measured in 2010 in a high -grinding press release And a press conference, organized by NASA. The discoverer, Felisa Wolfe-Simon, was funded as astrobiologist by the space agency. According to NASA, the find also had consequences for the search for extraterrestrial life. After all, these microorganisms seemed to do something alien. “We have created the door ajar to what is possible when life elsewhere in the universe,” hosted Wolfe-Simon the collected press.

But soon after the clarion, the criticism started. The article in Science in June 2011, a few months after the press conference, was immediately accompanied by technical comments from other researchers. They stated that certain experiments that could support the claim of arsenic-based life had not been done.

The DNA of that kind of microbes would also fall apart if it came into contact with water. Several microbiologists pointed to other problems with the study. There could be contamination with phosphorus. And the DNA may not have been sufficiently insulated for the analysis.

Science journalists picked up the criticism and Wolfe-Simon saw herself put away as a paria in her field. She then focused on a musical career as a oboist and helped startups that dealt with Biotech.

Fighting forward now. Since last year, Wolfe-Simon has been researching bacteria again. This time microbes with magnetic properties, with again financing of NASA. Reason for the New York Times To tell her story extensively.

Shortly thereafter, Science decided to withdraw the controversial publication from 2011. The reason that that only happens now: the criteria for withdrawing articles have changed since 2010 according to editor -in -chief Holden Thorp. “Science believes that the main conclusion of the paper is based on defective data.”

However, that decision by Science now also encounters fierce criticism. One of the co-authors of the controversial study, Ariel Anbar, insists that there were no mistakes in the study, only that the data could be interpreted in different ways. “You do not withdraw an article because of a dispute about the interpretation of the data,” he says. “If you do that, you have to withdraw half of all scientific literature.”

Dangerous decision

Anbar and Wolfe-Simon are supported by colleagues around the world. The Dutch astrobiologist Inge Loes ten Kate also thinks they have not been treated fairly. “As far as I know, no one has ever repeated the study exactly. That would be the only way to say that the data is incorrect. Science is now suggesting that the data has been tampered with. That is not the case.”

Ten Kate does not rule out the fact that the decision of Science has to do with the unwanted comeback from Wolfe-Simon. A dangerous decision, she thinks. “If the editor -in -chief without the scientific hearing can just withdraw articles that he doesn’t like, we can close science.

In this way, for example, COVID, climate and gender investigation will soon be put to death, Ten Kate warns. “Within the scientific community we check each other’s research, and that happens as integrally as possible. The editor -in -chief apparently thinks he is above science.”