> There are researchers that claim this makes it an even more virile cancer causing agent.
This is exceedingly vague, but also seems to fall into "extraordinary claims" territory.
We know the proteins SV40 expresses that immortalise cells, and we know their targets. Moreover, we know that delivering the proteins independently of SV40 can still immortalise cells, but SV40 mutated to disable those proteins can't.
The claim that the promoter by itself is a stronger cancer causing agent requires it to have an entirely different mechanism of action, but also one which isn't activated by all the other ways DNA fragments containing promoters can get into cells - like, say, everyday viruses. At first glance it doesn't pass the sniff test.
This is exceedingly vague, but also seems to fall into "extraordinary claims" territory.
We know the proteins SV40 expresses that immortalise cells, and we know their targets. Moreover, we know that delivering the proteins independently of SV40 can still immortalise cells, but SV40 mutated to disable those proteins can't.
The claim that the promoter by itself is a stronger cancer causing agent requires it to have an entirely different mechanism of action, but also one which isn't activated by all the other ways DNA fragments containing promoters can get into cells - like, say, everyday viruses. At first glance it doesn't pass the sniff test.