x********o
发帖数: 1442 | 1 【 以下文字转载自 Olympics 讨论区 】
发信人: xiaobenmao (水晶瓶子), 信区: Olympics
标 题: 对Nature失望透顶
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Aug 2 14:20:55 2012, 美东)
Nature太让我失望了，竟然发了这么一篇无论逻辑还是数据分析都漏洞百出的的狗屎文
章。
At the Olympics, how fast is too fast? That question has dogged Chinese
swimmer Ye Shiwen after the 16-year-old shattered the world record in the
women's 400-metre individual medley (400 IM) on Saturday. In the wake of
that race, some swimming experts wondered whether Ye’s win was aided by
performance-enhancing drugs. She has never tested positive for a banned
substance and the International Olympic Committee on Tuesday declared that
her post-race test was clean. The resulting debate has been tinged with
racial and political undertones, but little science. Nature examines whether
and how an athlete's performance history and the limits of human physiology
could be used to catch dopers.
Was Ye’s performance anomalous?
Yes. Her time in the 400 IM was more than 7 seconds faster than her time in
the same event at a major meet in July. But what really raised eyebrows was
her showing in the last 50 metres, which she swam faster than US swimmer
Ryan Lochte did when he won gold in the men’s 400 IM on Saturday, with the
second-fastest time ever for that event.
Doesn't a clean drug test during competition rule out the possibility of
doping?
No, says Ross Tucker, an exercise physiologist at the University of Cape
Town in South Africa. Athletes are much more likely to dope while in
training, when drug testing tends to be less rigorous. “Everyone will pass
at the Olympic games. Hardly anyone fails in competition testing,” Tucker
says.
Out-of-competition tests are more likely to catch dopers, he says, but it is
not feasible to test every elite athlete regularly year-round. Tracking an
athlete over time and flagging anomalous performances would help anti-doping
authorities to make better use of resources, says Yorck Olaf Schumacher, an
exercise physiologist at the Medical University of Freiburg in Germany, who
co-authored a 2009 paper proposing that performance profiling be used as an
anti-doping tool1. “I think it’s a good way and a cheap way to narrow
down a large group of athletes to suspicious ones, because after all, the
result of any doping is higher performance,” Schumacher says.
The ‘biological passport’, which measures characteristics of an athlete’s
blood to look for physiological evidence of doping, works in a similar way
to performance profiling (see 'Racing just to keep up'). After it was
introduced in 2008, cycling authorities flagged irregularities in the blood
characteristics of Antonio Colom, a Spanish cyclist, and targeted drug tests
turned up evidence of the banned blood-boosting hormone erythropoietin (EPO
) in 2009.
How would performance be used to nab dopers?
Anti-doping authorities need a better way of flagging anomalous performances
or patterns of results, says Schumacher. To do this, sports scientists need
to create databases that — sport by sport and event by event — record how
athletes improve with age and experience. Longitudinal records of athletes
’ performances would then be fed into statistical models to determine the
likelihood that they ran or swam too fast, given their past results and the
limits of human physiology.
The Olympic biathlon, a winter sport that combines cross-country skiing and
target shooting, has dabbled in performance profiling. In a pilot project,
scientists at the International Biathlon Union in Salzburg, Austria, and the
University of Ferrara in Italy, developed a software program that
retroactively analysed blood and performance data from 180 biathletes over
six years to identify those most likely to have doped2. The biathlon
federation now uses the software to target its athletes for drug testing.
Could an athlete then be disciplined simply for performing too well?
“That would be unfair,” says Tucker. “The final verdict is only ever
going to be reached by testing. It has to be.” In recent years, cycling
authorities have successfully prosecuted athletes for having anomalous blood
profiles, even when banned substances such as EPO could not be found. But
performance is too far removed from taking a banned substance and influenced
by too many outside factors to convict someone of doping, Tucker says. “
When we look at this young swimmer from China who breaks a world record,
that’s not proof of anything. It asks a question or two.”
气得我。。。。不过Lai Jiang下面的回复写的非常好：
Lai Jiang said:
It is a shame to see Nature, which nearly all scientists, including myself,
regard as the one of the most prestigious and influential physical science
magazines to publish a thinly-veiled biased article like this. Granted, this
is not a peer-reviewed scientific article and did not go through the
scrutiny of picking referees. But to serve as a channel for the general
populous to be in touch with and appreciate sciences, the authors and
editors should at least present the readers with facts within proper context
, which they failed to do blatantly.
First, to compare a player's performance increase, the author used Ye's 400m
IM time and her performance at the World championship 2011, which are 4:28.
43 and 4:35.15 respectively, and reached the conclusion that she has got an
"anomalous" increase by ~7 sec (6.72 sec). In fact she's previous personal
best was 4:33.79 at Asian Games 20101. This leads to a 5.38 sec increase. In
a sport event that 0.1 sec can be the difference between the gold and
silver medal, I see no reason that 5.38 sec can be treated as 7 sec.
Second, as previously pointed out, Ye is only 16 years old and her body is
still developing. Bettering oneself by 5 sec over two years may seem
impossible for an adult swimmer, but certainly happens among youngsters. Ian
Thorpe's interview revealed that his 400m freestyle time increased 5 sec
between the age of 15 and 162. For regular people including the author it
may be hard to imagine what an elite swimmer can achieve as he or she
matures, combined with scientific and persistent training. But jumping to a
conclusion that it is "anomalous" based on "Oh that's so tough I can not
imagine it is real" is hardly sound.
Third, to compare Ryan Lochte's last 50m to Ye's is a textbook example of
what we call to cherry pick your data. Yes, Lochte is slower than Ye in the
last 50m, but (as pointed out by Zhenxi) Lochte has a huge lead in the first
300m so that he chose to not push himself too hard to conserve energy for
latter events (whether this conforms to the Olympic spirit and the "use one'
s best efforts to win a match" requirement that the BWF has recently invoked
to disqualify four badminton pairs is another topic worth discussing,
probably not in Nature, though). On the contrary, Ye is trailing behind
after the first 300m and relies on freestyle, which she has an edge, to win
the game. Failing to mention this strategic difference, as well as the fact
that Lochte is 23.25 sec faster (4:05.18) over all than Ye creates the
illusion that a woman swam faster than the best man in the same sport, which
sounds impossible. Put aside the gender argument, I believe this is still a
leading question that implies the reader that something fishy is going on.
Fourth, another example of cherry picking. In the same event there are four
male swimmers that swam faster than both Lochter (29.10 sec)3 and Ye (28.93
sec)4: Hagino (28.52 sec), Phelps (28.44 sec), Horihata (27.87 sec) and
Fraser-Holmes (28.35 sec). As it turns out if we are just talking about the
last 50m in a 400m IM, Lochter would not have been the example to use if I
were the author. What kind of scientific rigorousness that author is trying
to demonstrate here? Is it logical that if Lochter is the champion, we
should assume he leads in every split? That would be a terrible way to teach
the public how science works.
Fifth, which is the one I oppose the most. The author quotes Tucks and
implies that a drug test can not rule out the possibility of doping. Is this
kind of agnosticism what Nature really wants to educate its readers? By
that standard I estimate that at least half of the peer-reviewed scientific
papers in Nature should be retracted. How can one convince the editors and
reviewers that their proposed theory works for every possible case? One
cannot. One chooses to apply the theory to typical examples and demonstrate
that in (hopefully) all scenarios considered the theory works to a degree,
and that should warrant a publication, until a counterexample is found. I
could imagine that the author has a skeptical mind which is critical to
scientific thinking, but that would be put into better use if he can write a
real peer-reviewed paper that discusses the odds of Ye doping on a highly
advanced non-detectable drug that the Chinese has come up within the last 4
years (they obviously did not have it in Beijing, otherwise why not to use
it and woo the audience at home?), based on data and rational derivation.
This paper, however, can be interpreted as saying that all athletes are
doping, and the authorities are just not good enough to catch them. That may
be true, logically, but definitely will not make the case if there is ever
a hearing by FINA to determine if Ye has doped. To ask the question that if
it is possible to false negative in a drug test looks like a rigged question
to me. Of course it is, other than the drug that the test is not designed
to detect, anyone who has taken Quantum 101 will tell you that everything is
probabilistic in nature, and there is a probability for the drug in an
athlete's system to tunnel out right at the moment of the test. A slight
change as it may be, should we disregard all test results because of it? Let
Ã￠a‚¬a„￠s be practical and reasonable. And accept
WADA is competent at its job. Her urine sample is stored for 8 years
following the contest for future testing as technology advances. Innocent
until proven guilty, shouldn't it be?
Sixth, and the last point I would like to make, is that the out-of-
competition drug test is already in effect, which the author failed to
mention. Per WADA presidentÃ￠a‚¬a„￠s press release5,
drug testing for olympians began at least 6 months prior to the opening of
the London Olympic. Furthermore there are 107 athletes who are banned from
this Olympic for doping. That maybe the reason that Ã￠a‚¬&#
197;“everyone will pass at the Olympic games. Hardly anyone fails in
competition testingÃ￠a‚¬Â? Because those who did
dope are already sanctioned? The author is free to suggest that a player
could have doped beforehand and fool the test at the game, but this
possibility certainly is ruled out for Ye.
Over all, even though the author did not falsify any data, he did (
intentionally or not) cherry pick data that is far too suggestive to be fair
and unbiased, in my view. If you want to cover a story of a suspected
doping from a scientific point of view, be impartial and provide all the
facts for the reader to judge. You are entitled to your interpretation of
the facts, and the expression thereof in your piece, explicitly or otherwise
, but only showing evidences which favor your argument is hardly good
science or journalism. Such an article in a journal like Nature is not an
appropriate example of how scientific research or report should be done.
1http://www.fina.org/H2O/index.php?option=com_wrapper&view=wrapper&Itemid=1241
2http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ETPUKlOwV4
3http://www.london2012.com/swimming/event/men-400m-individual-medley/phase=swm054100/index.html
4http://www.london2012.com/swimming/event/women-400m-individual-medley/phase=sww054100/index.html
5http://playtrue.wada-ama.org/news/wada-presidents-addresses-london-2012-press-conference/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=wada-presidents-addresses-london-2012-press-conference | l**k
发帖数: 45267 | 2 没有peer review的灌水都是瞎灌水，就好像新华网虽然挂着新华社官方网站的名义，
其实上面很多个人专栏是随便灌水没有官方背景的
【在 x********o 的大作中提到】
: 【 以下文字转载自 Olympics 讨论区 】
: 发信人: xiaobenmao (水晶瓶子), 信区: Olympics
: 标 题: 对Nature失望透顶
: 发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Aug 2 14:20:55 2012, 美东)
: Nature太让我失望了，竟然发了这么一篇无论逻辑还是数据分析都漏洞百出的的狗屎文
: 章。
: At the Olympics, how fast is too fast? That question has dogged Chinese
: swimmer Ye Shiwen after the 16-year-old shattered the world record in the
: women's 400-metre individual medley (400 IM) on Saturday. In the wake of
: that race, some swimming experts wondered whether Ye’s win was aided by
| y****r
发帖数: 3036 | 3 相当之扯淡。
【在 x********o 的大作中提到】
: 【 以下文字转载自 Olympics 讨论区 】
: 发信人: xiaobenmao (水晶瓶子), 信区: Olympics
: 标 题: 对Nature失望透顶
: 发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Aug 2 14:20:55 2012, 美东)
: Nature太让我失望了，竟然发了这么一篇无论逻辑还是数据分析都漏洞百出的的狗屎文
: 章。
: At the Olympics, how fast is too fast? That question has dogged Chinese
: swimmer Ye Shiwen after the 16-year-old shattered the world record in the
: women's 400-metre individual medley (400 IM) on Saturday. In the wake of
: that race, some swimming experts wondered whether Ye’s win was aided by
| b*********h
发帖数: 951 | | a****n
发帖数: 2031 | 5 药检如果是阳性，白男说，你看中国人吃兴奋剂了不是
药检如果是阴性，白男说，你看中国人吃了最新的兴奋剂不是，连药检都检测不出来。
【在 x********o 的大作中提到】
: 【 以下文字转载自 Olympics 讨论区 】
: 发信人: xiaobenmao (水晶瓶子), 信区: Olympics
: 标 题: 对Nature失望透顶
: 发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Aug 2 14:20:55 2012, 美东)
: Nature太让我失望了，竟然发了这么一篇无论逻辑还是数据分析都漏洞百出的的狗屎文
: 章。
: At the Olympics, how fast is too fast? That question has dogged Chinese
: swimmer Ye Shiwen after the 16-year-old shattered the world record in the
: women's 400-metre individual medley (400 IM) on Saturday. In the wake of
: that race, some swimming experts wondered whether Ye’s win was aided by
| s***e
发帖数: 7166 | 6 你们这帮文科生，真没用。
很简单，不管是吃得还是用的，是药还是补品，吃还是没吃，只要测不出来的就是合法
的。
【在 a****n 的大作中提到】
: 药检如果是阳性，白男说，你看中国人吃兴奋剂了不是
: 药检如果是阴性，白男说，你看中国人吃了最新的兴奋剂不是，连药检都检测不出来。
| W***n
发帖数: 11530 | 7
Nature, becomes a BS journel. That's my conclusion.
【在 x********o 的大作中提到】
: 【 以下文字转载自 Olympics 讨论区 】
: 发信人: xiaobenmao (水晶瓶子), 信区: Olympics
: 标 题: 对Nature失望透顶
: 发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Aug 2 14:20:55 2012, 美东)
: Nature太让我失望了，竟然发了这么一篇无论逻辑还是数据分析都漏洞百出的的狗屎文
: 章。
: At the Olympics, how fast is too fast? That question has dogged Chinese
: swimmer Ye Shiwen after the 16-year-old shattered the world record in the
: women's 400-metre individual medley (400 IM) on Saturday. In the wake of
: that race, some swimming experts wondered whether Ye’s win was aided by
| W***n
发帖数: 11530 | | a****n
发帖数: 2031 | 9 你还是不懂洋大人的想法，亚女游得比白男快，不吃药怎么可能呢。
亚女测不出来也不算合法。
【在 s***e 的大作中提到】
: 你们这帮文科生，真没用。
: 很简单，不管是吃得还是用的，是药还是补品，吃还是没吃，只要测不出来的就是合法
: 的。
| s***e
发帖数: 7166 | 10 那就要用洋人的法宝了，所谓无罪推定原则。
我没说不吃药，我说的是无论她吃了什么还是没吃什么，你测不出来/测出来的
不在你禁药范围内，就是合法的。
【在 a****n 的大作中提到】
: 你还是不懂洋大人的想法，亚女游得比白男快，不吃药怎么可能呢。
: 亚女测不出来也不算合法。
| | | d*******a
发帖数: 116 | | a****n
发帖数: 2031 | 12 洋大人的无罪推定只适用于白男白女
对于亚女，洋大人认为应该用自我举证，如果没有证据证明亚女没吃，那就是吃药了。
检测结果阴性，只能证明亚女没吃传统兴奋剂，不能证明没吃洋大人还不知道的土鳖国
可能刚研制出来的最新型兴奋剂。
【在 s***e 的大作中提到】
: 那就要用洋人的法宝了，所谓无罪推定原则。
: 我没说不吃药，我说的是无论她吃了什么还是没吃什么，你测不出来/测出来的
: 不在你禁药范围内，就是合法的。
| s***e
发帖数: 7166 | 13 好吧，她吃了最新型兴奋剂。检测结果是阴性，所以这种兴奋剂是合法的。
【在 a****n 的大作中提到】
: 洋大人的无罪推定只适用于白男白女
: 对于亚女，洋大人认为应该用自我举证，如果没有证据证明亚女没吃，那就是吃药了。
: 检测结果阴性，只能证明亚女没吃传统兴奋剂，不能证明没吃洋大人还不知道的土鳖国
: 可能刚研制出来的最新型兴奋剂。
| A******g
发帖数: 612 | 14 洋大人说米饭咸菜是兴奋剂，因为正常食物是burger，所以老中全部作弊
【在 s***e 的大作中提到】
: 好吧，她吃了最新型兴奋剂。检测结果是阴性，所以这种兴奋剂是合法的。
| I*******y
发帖数: 4893 | 15 这是一篇用来说明数据可以用来欺骗和歪曲的很好的文章。这是对经常把“数据”挂在
嘴上的理工男们的当头棒喝。
【在 x********o 的大作中提到】
: 【 以下文字转载自 Olympics 讨论区 】
: 发信人: xiaobenmao (水晶瓶子), 信区: Olympics
: 标 题: 对Nature失望透顶
: 发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Aug 2 14:20:55 2012, 美东)
: Nature太让我失望了，竟然发了这么一篇无论逻辑还是数据分析都漏洞百出的的狗屎文
: 章。
: At the Olympics, how fast is too fast? That question has dogged Chinese
: swimmer Ye Shiwen after the 16-year-old shattered the world record in the
: women's 400-metre individual medley (400 IM) on Saturday. In the wake of
: that race, some swimming experts wondered whether Ye’s win was aided by
| d****i
发帖数: 4809 | 16 跳梁小丑版的杂志，谁鸟他？Nature敢发这种文章，就是种族主义，没有事实的含沙射
影，带着有色镜来看人，怎么不去评论费尔普斯的8金呢？还有跟小叶子一样大的弗兰
克林的金牌呢？还有美国历史上刘易斯，乔伊纳的兴奋剂事件呢？还有美国发达的制药
业制造出目前无法检测的兴奋剂呢？
【在 x********o 的大作中提到】
: 【 以下文字转载自 Olympics 讨论区 】
: 发信人: xiaobenmao (水晶瓶子), 信区: Olympics
: 标 题: 对Nature失望透顶
: 发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Aug 2 14:20:55 2012, 美东)
: Nature太让我失望了，竟然发了这么一篇无论逻辑还是数据分析都漏洞百出的的狗屎文
: 章。
: At the Olympics, how fast is too fast? That question has dogged Chinese
: swimmer Ye Shiwen after the 16-year-old shattered the world record in the
: women's 400-metre individual medley (400 IM) on Saturday. In the wake of
: that race, some swimming experts wondered whether Ye’s win was aided by
| h*********r
发帖数: 10182 | 17 叶的问题完全就是从一个美国编外教练那里起来的。
完全是酸葡萄和歧视心理。
像叶这样的成绩突飞猛进的例子实在太多了。很年轻的队员随着的体格成长，技术突破
等等这样的几秒的提高太普通了。 | h***e
发帖数: 20195 | 18 洋大人不高兴了，党和新华社就尿裤子了
【在 x********o 的大作中提到】
: 【 以下文字转载自 Olympics 讨论区 】
: 发信人: xiaobenmao (水晶瓶子), 信区: Olympics
: 标 题: 对Nature失望透顶
: 发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Aug 2 14:20:55 2012, 美东)
: Nature太让我失望了，竟然发了这么一篇无论逻辑还是数据分析都漏洞百出的的狗屎文
: 章。
: At the Olympics, how fast is too fast? That question has dogged Chinese
: swimmer Ye Shiwen after the 16-year-old shattered the world record in the
: women's 400-metre individual medley (400 IM) on Saturday. In the wake of
: that race, some swimming experts wondered whether Ye’s win was aided by
| w*********o
发帖数: 830 | 19 NMGB，这跟党和新华社有什么联系。非要扯，也是白皮猪的不要脸舆论控制。
【在 h***e 的大作中提到】
: 洋大人不高兴了，党和新华社就尿裤子了
|
|
