wonder if we should replace 'coding' with 'canonical', i.e., lncRNA = long non-canonical RNA, as compared to long canonical RNA (mRNA)

sorry for steering off-topic but I think it's going to be very distant in the future for humans to escape death. and likely long before that, they will figure out how to solve the issue you brought up

the global cultural shift was in turn driven by industrial revolution. slavery existed for 1000s years around the world. there are many cultures that do not tolerate slavery. they did not end slavery globally. without Industrial Revolution to connect the world, I bet slavery still exists somewhere

To me ultimately it is new technology that drives societal progress, doesn't matter whether it's the old or the young invents those technologies. It's unclear to me whether extending health-span will slow down technology innovation. It could be the opposite.

6, I was really surprised to find that most refseq annotated microproteins remain uncharacterized. This includes 11 out of the 13 proteins shorter than 30 amino acids, many if which are highly conserved. To me, these are low hanging fruit for function studies.

5, should the field pivot from riboseq annotated microproteins to those annotated by mass spec? While fewer in number, ms supported microproteins still total in the 100s and could expand significantly through targeted proteomics in diverse samples.

4, for most hits, DNA or RNA based noncoding functions have not been ruled out, which should be the default hypothesis for KO phenotypes. Most studies did not adequately rule out translation dependent but protein independent functions, ie only the act of translation is functional

3, eg for lncRNA derived microproteins that show KO phenotypes, the majority do not have CRISPRi KD phenotype. I'm still trying to understand this. If this observation holds, it may point toward a DNA based function rather than one mediated by the encoded microprotein.

2, >90% cannot be detected by conventional mass spec but many are detected as MHC-I antigens, hinting at rapid degradation. While protein roles cannot be ruled out, most effects may arise from DNA, RNA, or the act of translation. KO screen cannot distinguished those.

1, >1000 microproteins have been identified as functional hits across six CRISPR KO screens. However, large-scale complementary validation screens to rule out false positives are lacking. My estimate is that a large fraction of these hits are false positives, for several reasons.

We hope this review stimulates interest and sparks discussion in functional studies of microproteins. While we tried to be balanced in the review, there were some potentially controversial opinions that I intentionally left out. Here is a short thread to share those thoughts:

congratulations! great to see this very interesting work in print

The total length of human DNA on the planet right now is thus: (3.4x10^-10) • (2 x 3.055x10^9) • (3x10^13) • (8.2x10^9) = 5.11 x 10^23 meters

Time to call in NASA!

1 *light-year* – the distance light travels in one year – is 9.46x10^15 meters...

So: 54 million light-years of human DNA!

I don't usually give feedback during the interview, in part b/c I need all the 30 min to evaluate the candidate. Now I feel like this is not right. Our feedback will be super useful for them. It's like grant review, reviewers did the assessment but comments are not shared with applicants.