antisense delivery by liposomes

Stephen R. Lasky Stephen_Lasky at brown.edu
Thu Feb 8 08:16:03 EST 1996


Lots of replies cut out:


> > > Iddo (idoerg at shum.cc.huji.ac.il) wrote:
> > > 
> > > : Hello all,
> > > : I'm in the preliminary stages of setting up an assay which requires the 
> > > : delivery of phosphorothioated antisense-DNA (PS-DNA) to a primary cell-
> > > ................................^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > > 
> > > AAAAaaaaaaarrrgggggggghhhhhhhh!!!!
> > > 
> > > -Paul.
> > 

Realizing that I am one of the people opposed to the use of sense and
anti-sense for describing DNA (lets clarify that and say dsDNA especially
when refering to cistrons), I just want to say that this is the correct
use of the term.  Anti-sense DNA is that same as anti-sense RNA.  My
question is why modify it?  I thought the advantage of using anti-sense
DNA rather than anti-sense RNA is that it is more stable and doesn't need
to be modified to be effective.  The disadvantage is that the duplexes
formed are less stable than RNA:DNA duplexes.  Is this wrong?

SRLasky

-- 
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Stephen R. Lasky Ph.D.   Brown U/Roger Williams Medical Center,  Providence, RI.   
Phone: 401-456-5672     Fax: 401-456-6569     e:mail: Stephen_Lasky at brown.edu
===================================================================
America may be unique in being a country which has leapt from barbarism to decadence without touching civilization.  John O'Hara.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^



More information about the Methods mailing list