RE: A question about the addendum to your Nature paper

In context

A single line often inverts meaning once you see what it answers, so neighbouring messages are always shown.

1. 2021-06-25 02:09 Clare Thomas open
   Dear Zhengli, I wonder whether you have had a chance to consider my email below? I am sorry to bug you about it, but we do have an obligation to look into any queries that we receive about any Nature paper that we publish. I can imagine that you must be quite frustrated with these sorts of queries, but if there is an explanation for the apparent discrepancy highlighted to us then it would be great if you could please let us know. Many thanks in advance and all the best, Clare
2. 2021-06-29 00:13 unattributed open
   Dear Clare, Thank you for your information. I'm fine with the passing to the journalist on the information I told you. Best regards, Zhengli, nooo JAAD E--- AEA: "Clare Thomas" im puecom> BIKA [A] :202 1-06-29 04:39:21 ital wh.iov.cn" a iov.cn> S RE: RE: A question about the addendum to your Nature paper Dear Zhengli, Thanks again for replying to my question about the discrepancy highlighted to us. We've received some queries about it from journalists. Conversations between editors and authors are confidential but I wanted to ask you if you would have any objection to our passing on the information that you have told us? Would you be willing for us to tell the journalists that you have told us that the bioinformatics approaches used to analyse the genome sequences in the Nature paper and the thesis were different? We are considering how to respond and wonder whether this might help dampen the speculation. Please could you let me know? All the best, Clare
3. 2021-06-29 00:13 unattributed open
   Dear Clare, Thank you for your information. I'm fine with the passing to the journalist on the information I told you. Best regards, Zhengli, nooo JAAD E--- AEA: "Clare Thomas" im puecom> BIKA [A] :202 1-06-29 04:39:21 ital wh.iov.cn" a iov.cn> S RE: RE: A question about the addendum to your Nature paper Dear Zhengli, Thanks again for replying to my question about the discrepancy highlighted to us. We've received some queries about it from journalists. Conversations between editors and authors are confidential but I wanted to ask you if you would have any objection to our passing on the information that you have told us? Would you be willing for us to tell the journalists that you have told us that the bioinformatics approaches used to analyse the genome sequences in the Nature paper and the thesis were different? We are considering how to respond and wonder whether this might help dampen the speculation. Please could you let me know? All the best, Clare
4. 2025-01-06 02:09 Clare Thomas open
   Dear Zhengli, I wonder whether you have had a chance to consider my email below? I am sorry to bug you about it, but we do have an obligation to look into any queries that we receive about any Nature paper that we publish. I can imagine that you must be quite frustrated with these sorts of queries, but if there is an explanation for the apparent discrepancy highlighted to us then it would be great if you could please let us know. Many thanks in advance and all the best, Clare
5. 2025-01-06 02:09 Clare Thomas
   Dear Zhengli, I wonder whether you have had a chance to consider my email below? I am sorry to bug you about it, but we do have an obligation to look into any queries that we receive about any Nature paper that we publish. I can imagine that you must be quite frustrated with these sorts of queries, but if there is an explanation for the apparent discrepancy highlighted to us then it would be great if you could please let us know. Many thanks in advance and all the best, Clare

Full conversation →