We work with various proteins in the lab and one of our most commonly used procedures involves detecting the presence of specific proteins and any modifications that may have been done to them. We recently ran into a detection reagent that did not function as advertised. It sure detected the protein we wanted, but it detected modifications that were not there. We had engineered the protein to specifically not be modified, but the antibody showed this modification was present, even though physically impossible. How can this be? Shouldn’t the company have thoroughly tested its product before sending it out to the public for consumption?

This raises the question of product specificity from any biotech company. Who is running quality control experiments with these reagents to ensure that researchers don’t waste months trying to get a faulty product to work only to find the product was designed wrong? There should be an industry standard for biotech companies to send their reagents, especially antibodies, to third party companies that can run unbiased tests and in turn, certify each product that is sent out. Everyone wins in this instance. A new business is started, the biotech companies have a stamp of approval placed on their products, and the researchers are guaranteed effective products (less headache for them – they have enough as it is just being in research). Food on the market has the FDA, scientific research reagents should have something similar.

Here is some data showing the non-specificity of this product. The top blot shows the general presence of protein. The arrow points to the band in the bottom blot that should not be present because the site on the protein that gets modified has been mutated to be unable to obtain this modification. We are currently in the process of requesting a refund.

Reply to “Biotech Accountability”