Dominic-Luc Webb molmed <Dominic.Luc-Webb at molmed.ki.se> sent the following
message to my email address:
>On 9 Jun 2000, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>>> Herbert Sauro wrote,
>>>> >Odd you should mention this topic because I had a quick look at some newly
>> >published biochemistry text books last weekend and was surprised to see
>>that
>> >after all these years they still proudly spell out very clearly the idea of
>> >the rate-limiting step. I was even more surprised to see the rate-limiting
>> >step boldly announced in the new edition of Lehninger. It makes one wonder
>> >that if there are such blatant misconceptions in one part of the book, how
>> >are we to trust the rest of the material?
>>I just entered the newsgroup and believe you are discussing
>the topic of my Ph.D. thesis here at Karolinska. Prof Keith Tornheim
>at Boston University has been supervising this aspect of my thesis.
>>I work with PFK and am doing math models as well as molecular
>biology with this protein. I know of no argument against
>PFK as rate limiting step. If you have such an argument,
>could you please explain. Even better, if this is a sound
>argument, could I politely suggest publishing your idea in
>Science or Nature. None of my collegues working in this
>field are aware of this argument and such an argument
>could potentially discredit many dozens of publications by
>dozens of the most prominent biochemists in the world.
>certainly that would be cause for a major publication.
>>Ideally, respond to my email address as I do not
>enter this group normally.
>I declined to respond to his email address because, but told him that I
would answer on this group if he sent his query to the group, as I could
see no reason to deal privately with a query that arises out of a public
discussion (unless of course it was private in nature).
He replied:
>As I stated, I merely do not go to this group normally.
>I also do not believe a usenet newsgroup is appropriate
>place for people to discredit sound medical and
>biochemical research. If there is an argument against
>PFK as the rate limiting step, I would prefer a very
>short explanation and again recommend publishing it
>in a peer-reviewed journal. You are of course welcome
>to cc to the newsgroup.
So here it is.
People who choose not to visit a news group are perfectly free not to so,
but they shouldn't expect to be answered to their email addresses,
especially if they haven't bothered to read the FAQ or the messages earlier
in the thread. If Mr Webb had so he would have already found the answer to
his main question. However, he wouldn't have found an answer to the
question of why I haven't published "my" idea in Science or Nature. The
answer to that is simple: it isn't my idea.
So although I continue to decline to answer Mr Webb's question if he
continues to refuse to address it to the news group, I quote it here in
case anyone else would like to answer it.
Athel
Email: athel at ibsm.cnrs-mrs.fr
MCA FAQ: http://ir2lcb.cnrs-mrs.fr/~athel/mcafaq.htm
The rate-limiting step of glycolysis: http://ir2lcb.cnrs-mrs.fr/~athel/rls.htm
---
