This is an automated archive made by the Lemmit Bot.
The original was posted on /r/science by /u/shiruken on 2025-07-29 04:02:47+00:00.
We wish to inform the r/science community of an article submitted to the subreddit that has since been retracted by the journal. While originally published almost 15 years ago and prior to the implementation of our current rules regarding reposts, flair, and link quality, these submissions garnered significant exposure on Reddit and enormous media coverage because of NASA's sensational press conference announcing the discovery. Per our rules, the flair on these submissions have been updated with "RETRACTED". The submissions have also been added to our wiki of retracted submissions.
Top 5 r/science submissions of the article (of an identified 20):
- Nasa to unveil new life form: Bacteria that thrive on arsenic [The Guardian]
- Best writeup I've seen so far on Arsenic life.
- The NASA study of arsenic-based life was fatally flawed, say scientists. - Slate Magazine
- Rosie Redfield thoroughly dismembers NASA's arsenic paper
- Actual title: "NASA will hold a news conference at 11 a.m. PST on Thursday, Dec. 2, to discuss an astrobiology finding that will impact the search for evidence of extraterrestrial life,"
The article "A Bacterium That Can Grow by Using Arsenic Instead of Phosphorus" has been retracted from Science as of July 24, 2025. From the moment this paper was published online on December 2, 2010, it was embroiled in controversy. Science (and r/science) was flooded with commentary on the problems with the work and did not publish it in print until June 3, 2011, where it was accompanied by eight Technical Comments, a Technical Response from the authors, and a note from then Editor-in-Chief Bruce Alberts explaining the decision and timing. In July 2012, Science published two papers showing that the bacterium was resistant to arsenate but did not incorporate it into biomolecules as originally claimed. However, the paper was not retracted in 2012 because Retractions were reserved at the time as an alert about data manipulation or for authors to provide information about post-publication issues.
The editors of Science maintain the view that "there was no deliberate fraud or misconduct on the part of the authors" even to this day. However, their standards for retractions have expanded. If a paper's reported experiments do not support its key conclusions, even if no fraud or manipulation occurred, a Retraction is now considered appropriate. On the basis of the Technical Comments and the 2012 papers, Science has decided to retract the article. All the living Authors disagree with the retraction and have published an eLetter disputing the decision.
- Science Editor's Blog: The last step in a long process on "arsenic life"
- Retraction Watch: After 15 years of controversy, Science retracts 'arsenic life' paper
- Science Insider: Fifteen years later, Science retracts 'arsenic life' paper despite study authors' protests
- Nature News: Controversial 'arsenic life' paper retracted after 15 years — but authors fight back
- Scientific American: 'Arsenic Life' Microbe Study Retracted after 15 Years of Controversy
- NYTimes: Claim of Microbe That Survives on Arsenic Is Retracted After 15 Years
Should you encounter a submission on r/science that has been retracted, please notify the moderators via Modmail.