作者mitbbsuser (mitbbs user)
看板Biotech
標題Re: The origin of this affair
時間Sun Dec 17 04:31:12 2006
Can't agree you more! :)
※ 引述《femto (朝朝暮暮)》之銘言：
: for me there are two main points in your post.
: 1.a scientific article should be as rigorous as possilbe.
: in this regard, I total agree with you and CELL editors
: that a paper with any possible flaw should be retracted.
: 2.Dr.Chang and Taiwanese resent Chineses for pointing out the "truth".
: then, I would say most posts in mitbbs are truly offensive for Taiwanse,
: and they dont mean to discuss science as you described.
: as for Dr.Chang's "irritating" reply, he mentioned he was angry that
: he got many rude email from Chinese, since we don't know what are in
: the email he got, no one can conclude if it is Dr.Chang or those who
: wrote mail to him are impolite.
: let's just leave the focus on the first point.
: ※ 引述《mitbbsuser (mitbbs user)》之銘言：
: : 1.A Russian researcher in the US first noticed the questionable figures in
: : the Cell paper and shared this finding with his Chinese labmate.
: : 2.The Chinese labmate posted the finding on mitbbs, one of the most popular
: : BBS of oversea Chinese. Frankly speaking, the guy made some harsh allegation
: : when he posted the thread. However, no one really took action at this step.
: : 3.After the first several days discussion on mitbbs, people there, mostly
: : researchers from mainland, think it is better to contact the author first,
: : instead of contacting the journal directly.
: : 4.It is impossible to estimate how many people wrote to Dr. Chang and how
: : they said in those correspondances.
: : 5.Then someone posted a reply of Dr. Chang, which irritated a lot of people
: : due to some impolite and improper remarks.
: : 6.Meanwhile, some people still tried contacting Dr. Chang. But student from
: : Dr. Chang's lab refused to provide the original data unless they know the
: : identities of those requesters.
: : 7.Then some people have to write to the journal but without any allegation.
: : They just presented what they felt questionable and didn't make any
: : conclusion in the mails. However, it's still possible that some other people
: : wrote something else to the journal.
: : 8.However, before that, another student showed the paper to his PI, who is
: : a Cell editor. He was angry with what he saw and made a call directly to
: : Emilie, the Cell editor. This should happen before people wrote to Cell.
: : 9.At the same time, someone contacted Mike Rossner, a JCB editor, to asked for
: : his advice. Dr. Rossner confirmed with their finding.
: : My humble suggestions are
: : a. Don't make your judgement before you see those figures or do some analysis
: : yourself, don't trust Dr. Chang's lab only because it is a Taiwan lab.
: : We are scientists, we should make judgement based on data, not subjective
: : allegation.
: : b. Don't blame those researchers from mainland on pointing out some
: : questionable figures. It just happened to be that those guy who wrote to Cell
: : are Chinese. They are not against you Taiwan fellows, they tried contacting
: : Dr. Chang at the very beginning, they desperately tried many different
: : methods to analyse the figure only because they didn't want to make any
: : harsh or even wrong observations before they wrote to the journal.
: : In a word, judge with your own eyes.
: : Thanks for reading
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 69.227.164.126