Co-author of the Science mirror life paper here. In the paper we argued that the risks of mirror _life_ were very severe, but said that research into mirror _molecules_ (i.e. including proteins) has potential scientific and therapeutic applications and should continue, not be banned!
Coauthor of the original mirror life paper here - just wanted to say that my coauthors and I are grateful for the constructive dialogue on this topic!
Agree that mirror autotrophs would have an easier time (see ch 8) and that nutrient access will be a competitive disadvantage for heterotrophs. But mirror bacteria would have a major advantage too by being resistant to predators. This could tip the balance to growth > death bsky.app/profile/micr...
Co-author of the paper here! Infection in humans is discussed in detail in ch4 of the technical report. There are achiral nutrients (table 1.1) that a mirror bacterium could eat, or it could be engineered to eat chiral ones. Feel free to reach out with more Qs! purl.stanford.edu/cv716pj4036
The content of v1 was essentially identical to v2, with only a small edit to update the title of the finalised Science article. Hope that clarifies!
This thread also addresses this question: bsky.app/profile/micr...
Hi Mark! Coauthor of the paper here. Some antibodies would bind, but overall antibody response would likely be impaired by upstream issues with inflammation and downstream issues with antigen presentation. See section 4.3 of the technical report: purl.stanford.edu/cv716pj4036
Co-author of the Science paper here! Seems likely it could survive. Check out chapter 8 of the technical report for discussion of ecological aspects, Ch 4 & 6 for survival in humans & animal, and Ch 7 for plants: purl.stanford.edu/cv716pj4036. Feel free to reach out if you have remaining questions
