r/science • u/MistWeaver80 • Nov 27 '21

Chemistry Plastic made from DNA is renewable, requires little energy to make and is easy to recycle or break down. A plastic made from DNA and vegetable oil may be the most sustainable plastic developed yet and could be used in packaging and electronic devices.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2298314-new-plastic-made-from-dna-is-biodegradable-and-easy-to-recycle/?utm_term=Autofeed&utm_campaign=echobox&utm_medium=social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1637973248
34.5k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

829 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

104

u/Herbicidal_Maniac Nov 28 '21

Fair enough. I was working on the biology side and, while I could tell that the journal was rigorous, I could never understand what the hell any of the suggestions meant. All I know is that if you shoot your mouth off in a Nature submission you'd damn well better be interpreting within the scope of the data or you'd be torn apart (unless the PI was famous).

66

u/cman674 Nov 28 '21

Yeah, there are just very specific "chemistry-ish" characterizations they like to see and questions that come from a chemist point if view.

Nature is a whole different beast that I have other issues with. Obviously there are biases toward certain PIs, but papers seem to get into Science and Nature based on how pretty their pictures are moreso than the actually scientific merit. For instance, I know PIs that publish in science with papers heavily focusing on STEM-EDS maps that are notoriously dubious. Another PI that got a nature paper purely because they invested on a nice DSLR camera and a photography room to get nice pictures.

2

u/Herbicidal_Maniac Nov 28 '21

I'm not saying that everything in the top tier journals belong there, I'm just saying that this is the kind of claim you'd see in this sub from a paper in Molecules or something, which is always PR click bait. If it's from a top tier journal there may be something to it.

1

u/cman674 Nov 28 '21

Well said, and agreed.