An easier approach than synthesis from scratch would be to modify a conventional flu virus with the 8 published genes of the 1918 virus.
Research failed Research could not run for this claim; not scored.
Factual: Statements about the present or the past, checked against the record: did they hold up?
What would count as true or false
Judge as of October 2005. TRUE: virology sources confirm both components — (a) all 8 gene segments of the 1918 influenza virus had been sequenced and published by October 2005, and (b) inserting one or more of those published 1918 genes into a conventional/contemporary influenza virus background by reverse genetics was technically easier than synthesising the whole 1918 virus de novo. MOSTLY TRUE: both hold but a minor detail is off (e.g. the number of segments described, or publication date of the final segment slightly different) while the substantive comparison stands. MIXED: the 8 genes were published but expert sources disagree on whether the modification route is easier than full synthesis. MOSTLY FALSE: the gene-substitution route existed but was not easier (comparable or harder difficulty), so the claim overstates a real technique. FALSE: evidence shows the 1918 genome's 8 segments were not all published as of October 2005, or that reassortant/reverse-genetics modification of a conventional flu virus with 1918 genes was not possible at that time.
Set before the research began.
Reasoning
Research or judging failed: research_plan:c_810a7e545e15: refusal
Cite this claim
Ray Kurzweil, “An easier approach than synthesis from scratch would be to modify a conventional flu virus with the 8 published genes of the 1918 virus.” (said October 2005). Verdict: research failed. Reliability API, claim c_810a7e545e15, method 0.1.0+28da144b, dataset release v1.1.2. https://epistacklabs.com/claims/c_810a7e545e15
This claim is in dataset release v1.1.2, with the same verdict.
Reply to this claim
More factual claims by Ray Kurzweil
-
Resolved false
“Moderna, they actually gathered several billion different possibilities for what could cause COVID.”
-
Resolved true
“The US government has a plan to actually create new vaccines within a few months to three months.”
The US government has a plan to create new vaccines within a few months to three months.
-
Mostly true
“US researchers are now testing this optimized flu vaccine on human subjects.”
As of May 2020, US researchers are testing the Flinders-optimized flu vaccine on human subjects.
-
Mostly true
“created a turbo-charged flu vaccine in part by using a biology simulator that used AI to find drugs that activate the human immune system.”
-
Resolved true
“There are promising new technologies, like RNA interference, that could be harnessed.”
Verdicts are made automatically; how verdicts are made.