Re: The origin of this affair

看板Biotech (生命科學)作者mitbbsuser (mitbbs user)時間19年前 (2006/12/17 04:30)推噓0(0推 0噓 0→)

留言0則, 0人參與討論串3/5 (看更多)

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