> I would be more worried if the blotted area was different (the dark blob)

Or if more than one blob is present (i.e. blobs at different molecular weights) for a supposedly selective and specific antibody that should show exactly one blob on the blot.

> Now, if while preparing the images they needed to do some editorial choices

Editorial choices on raw scientific data are a big no-no.

▲

raverbashing 4 hours ago | parent [-]

> Editorial choices on raw scientific data are a big no-no.

I don't think you can find a picture in an article that hasn't been photoshopped in one way or another (which is mostly ok as long as it is not misleading)

Edit: TF's reply is interesting https://www.thermofisher.com/es/es/home/life-science/antibod...

Basically they say they are reviewing the images

▲

flobosg 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Usually, journals require raw, unmodified data to be deposited as supplementary information.

▲

raverbashing 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Yes, as supplementary information

(Also journals are usually more rigorous than marketing material)

	▲	flobosg 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> Yes, as supplementary information Still part of the article.