q*a
发帖数: 2330 | 1 ☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
jianglai (Veni, Vidi, Vici.) 于 (Thu Aug 2 02:54:30 2012, 美东) 提到:
http://www.nature.com/news/why-great-olympic-feats-raise-suspic
英帝堕落到什么地步了。。。
★ 发自iPhone App: ChineseWeb 7.3.1
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
daye520 (哈哈) 于 (Thu Aug 2 02:56:00 2012, 美东) 提到:
罗切特每次都被拿出来做背景。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
michaelxiaga (南京中山陵) 于 (Thu Aug 2 02:58:53 2012, 美东) 提到:
回复里面有一个哥们写的不错
其实咱们在这里说有啥用, 就得用英文反驳white trash
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
thirddown (人在天涯) 于 (Thu Aug 2 03:00:09 2012, 美东) 提到:
Speechless, what a shame!
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Lohan (Jerry) 于 (Thu Aug 2 03:00:57 2012, 美东) 提到:
this is outrageous, I thought nature was a scientific journal at least
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
backdoor (茄茄——做一只诚恳滴资深茄子) 于 (Thu Aug 2 03:02:13 2012, 美东) 提到:
底下的评论非常给力啊。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
thirddown (人在天涯) 于 (Thu Aug 2 03:06:44 2012, 美东) 提到:
必须有所行动，我真是出离愤怒了
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Diadora (枯藤老树烤鸭 小桥流水酒家) 于 (Thu Aug 2 03:06:57 2012, 美东) 提到:
下面comment的反击写的不错
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
carbonfiber (碳纤维) 于 (Thu Aug 2 03:08:57 2012, 美东) 提到:
Nature竟然搞这种东西出来了？就太TMD恶心了……
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
mikelanglang (麦克狼) 于 (Thu Aug 2 03:09:40 2012, 美东) 提到:
有两个中国人的回复相当不错
写了相当长，真是用心了
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
ZZGR (闲逛) 于 (Thu Aug 2 03:12:27 2012, 美东) 提到:
nature上这种新闻只是大众科普的水平，作者也只是个UCSC的微生物的硕士而已。
不过估计善于自我批评的公知又有新的自虐器材了。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
zaiseaby (zai) 于 (Thu Aug 2 03:13:13 2012, 美东) 提到:
md，字里行间，别有用心，nature能允许这种文章？
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
YanShouYi (有一说一) 于 (Thu Aug 2 03:14:27 2012, 美东) 提到:
忍不住要问候作者全家
这他妈到底是个什么世界
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
windwf (wind) 于 (Thu Aug 2 03:14:40 2012, 美东) 提到:
Lai Jiang的回复太NB了!
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
xjock (我懂你的) 于 (Thu Aug 2 03:18:26 2012, 美东) 提到:
给楼主发包子吧，写的很好。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
allanzc (品质保证) 于 (Thu Aug 2 03:23:13 2012, 美东) 提到:
Lai jiang 评论的英文水平不错啊
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
ZZGR (闲逛) 于 (Thu Aug 2 03:23:48 2012, 美东) 提到:
是你回复的吗？很好啊，收包子。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Acartia (深水鱼) 于 (Thu Aug 2 03:29:10 2012, 美东) 提到:
中国民间知识分子的正义良心和战斗力还在
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
dakedo (大蝌蚪) 于 (Thu Aug 2 03:32:48 2012, 美东) 提到:
这个回复得写多久啊……
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
wazf2000 (huerjx) 于 (Thu Aug 2 03:35:31 2012, 美东) 提到:
回复写的太好了！
建议大家都来支持！都去英文回复！
jiang lai大哥写的真是太太太好了！ SUPER 赞！
http://www.nature.com/news/why-great-olympic-feats-raise-suspic
英帝堕落到什么地步了。。。
★ 发自iPhone App: ChineseWeb 7.3.1
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
wep (黑丝) 于 (Thu Aug 2 03:37:03 2012, 美东) 提到:
下面的comments写得很棒！
不过我们应该跟Nature投诉，把这种垃圾文章撤掉！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
wep (黑丝) 于 (Thu Aug 2 03:37:38 2012, 美东) 提到:
你写的comments非常赞！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
goodevil (灌水打架专用马甲) 于 (Thu Aug 2 03:45:50 2012, 美东) 提到:
无语了
nature在我心里地位一落千丈
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
sitan (黑白熊) 于 (Thu Aug 2 03:47:34 2012, 美东) 提到:
哪个邮箱投诉编辑来撤掉此文？至少要大revise
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
drude (觉得) 于 (Thu Aug 2 03:49:17 2012, 美东) 提到:
真的有种看黄色期刊的感觉。一直以为这是偏科学方面的严肃期刊，结果这种文章都能
刊出来。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
ZZGR (闲逛) 于 (Thu Aug 2 03:51:09 2012, 美东) 提到:
个人认为没啥用，写一些像jianglai这样有内容的comments更有意义。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
tayer (dirht) 于 (Thu Aug 2 03:53:04 2012, 美东) 提到:
One comment written by Lai Jiang was excellent. If you wrote it, you should
ask Nature to publish it as a rebuttal.
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
aragorn (Elessar) 于 (Thu Aug 2 04:02:15 2012, 美东) 提到:
潜了两年水，今天破戒登录上来感谢楼主。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
YuHuaShi (LittleApple) 于 (Thu Aug 2 04:02:46 2012, 美东) 提到:
1.对NATURE 出离愤怒了。What a shame! 支持去抗议！
2.赞JiangLai, comments 写得丰常好！英文很棒，也有理有节。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
wep (黑丝) 于 (Thu Aug 2 04:03:15 2012, 美东) 提到:
投诉有用的，Nature撤掉这种垃圾文章的事不止一起
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
wazf2000 (huerjx) 于 (Thu Aug 2 04:04:54 2012, 美东) 提到:
谁给贴个投诉的LINK？
大家都去投诉，只要投诉足够多，该是会受理的吧！
投诉有用的，Nature撤掉这种垃圾文章的事不止一起
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Gargamel (Azrael) 于 (Thu Aug 2 04:09:06 2012, 美东) 提到:
回复的超好，真是自愧不如。 准备转发给同事们了。 谢谢你
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
zhaohu (天外飞猪) 于 (Thu Aug 2 04:41:37 2012, 美东) 提到:
感谢楼主！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
fiatLux (Let there be light) 于 (Thu Aug 2 04:45:33 2012, 美东) 提到:
大赞！
你是我们奥运场外的英雄。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
zumanok (zumanok) 于 (Thu Aug 2 04:52:02 2012, 美东) 提到:
非常好，感谢。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
jimmykk22 (Jimmy) 于 (Thu Aug 2 04:52:15 2012, 美东) 提到:
不如上twitter一起问候他好了。https://twitter.com/ewencallaway
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
go88 (旧友重来) 于 (Thu Aug 2 05:01:15 2012, 美东) 提到:
RE! 向楼主致敬！！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
zaiseaby (zai) 于 (Thu Aug 2 05:10:33 2012, 美东) 提到:
lz英文真是超赞...行为就更赞了
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
kingtiger (tiger) 于 (Thu Aug 2 05:17:34 2012, 美东) 提到:
re！！
should
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
panzercy (zed) 于 (Thu Aug 2 05:42:37 2012, 美东) 提到:
向lz致敬，学习了。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
thymeee (节俭灌水种地养娃) 于 (Thu Aug 2 05:48:39 2012, 美东) 提到:
感谢你。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
JackFighter (jf~) 于 (Thu Aug 2 05:57:24 2012, 美东) 提到:
楼主超赞，致敬！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
mythought (慢骚) 于 (Thu Aug 2 06:18:05 2012, 美东) 提到:
感谢共享和你的努力。会转发给更多的同学让大家有所行动
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
orthberg (james) 于 (Thu Aug 2 06:22:19 2012, 美东) 提到:
赞楼主！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
dongbeiren2 (东北人) 于 (Thu Aug 2 06:42:55 2012, 美东) 提到:
editor的倾向太明显了
那phelps更不符合生理学现象
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Gypsygirl (毒牙小姐) 于 (Thu Aug 2 06:49:28 2012, 美东) 提到:
恩，已经去留言了
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Qiutian (秋天) 于 (Thu Aug 2 06:58:41 2012, 美东) 提到:
支持。建议再加上那个英国的adlington去年800米最后50米的成绩，比小叶的还快一点
、以及立陶宛那个小姑娘的提高幅度
should
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Longislander (littledog) 于 (Thu Aug 2 07:24:24 2012, 美东) 提到:
This comment makes my day.
2012-08-02 06:24 AM
Report this comment | #47529
Wendell Parker said:
Research of human is too much for a master degree in microbiology?
There are many similar cases as to Ye's.
Elizabeth Beisel, (born August 18, 1992)
2006: 4:50.31
2007: 4:44.87 -5s!
2008: 4:32.87 -12s!
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
SweetJan08 (Jan) 于 (Thu Aug 2 07:26:59 2012, 美东) 提到:
楼主的行文太赞了！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
aacaac (aac) 于 (Thu Aug 2 07:39:17 2012, 美东) 提到:
虽然发在nature online上，这水平还是低端黑啊。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
googlele (爱谁谁) 于 (Thu Aug 2 07:39:24 2012, 美东) 提到:
LZ的回复真心棒啊！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
TheSun (纯阳) 于 (Thu Aug 2 07:59:59 2012, 美东) 提到:
多谢好文。你的回复应该同时发给那个文章作者和nature主编
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
stubofor (子任) 于 (Thu Aug 2 08:03:28 2012, 美东) 提到:
出离愤怒了！这tmd太恶心了。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
TTU (Call for Drama) 于 (Thu Aug 2 08:23:28 2012, 美东) 提到:
nature include human nature
lol
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
inergas (大坏猪) 于 (Thu Aug 2 08:30:12 2012, 美东) 提到:
文章并没有暗示叶服药，只是在推销他们那个检测系统。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
zli (茶众，not Tea Party) 于 (Thu Aug 2 08:31:27 2012, 美东) 提到:
赞楼主！ 10个包子（别排，只给楼主）！
啥时候到纽约我请你吃饭！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
chyang (悲愤WS笨红脖) 于 (Thu Aug 2 08:32:04 2012, 美东) 提到:
ding
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
inergas (大坏猪) 于 (Thu Aug 2 08:39:29 2012, 美东) 提到:
我有点怀疑这个作者读报道读错了。他说“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.”给
人印象好像是小叶的奥运成绩比今年7月的某次比赛提高7秒，如果真是这样，当然是
anomalous。但实际上那个是去年7月。
如果这句话是故意误导，那确实算是黑。
不过这个可能性不大，因为也太低级了吧，呵呵。
谁去把这点去那里给大家指出来。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Paulina (养鹤轩主人★肌肉女：strong is beautiful) 于 (Thu Aug 2 08:39:49 2012, 美东) 提到:
they will never stop talking regardless what happens.
走自己的路，让别人说吧
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
sealtj (我只看看) 于 (Thu Aug 2 08:50:11 2012, 美东) 提到:
sb作者的邮箱：
e********[email protected]
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
yinan (yinan) 于 (Thu Aug 2 08:52:47 2012, 美东) 提到:
好像不能comment了
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
jianglai (Veni, Vidi, Vici.) 于 (Thu Aug 2 08:53:05 2012, 美东) 提到:
脸皮真是比墙厚了
We appreciate that the case of Ye Shiwen is a sensitive one for some readers
. However, I would like to point out that this story was not intended to
insinuate that Ye is guilty of anything. As we point out in the first
paragraph, she has never failed a drug test and so is the rightful Olympic
champion.
We wanted to use the controversy as a way to highlight what science can and
can't tell us with respect to athletes' performance. We have done similar
stories before, for example in the case of South African runner Caster
Semenya
Congratulations to Ye Shiwen on her incredible win!
Brian Owens
Online news editor
★ 发自iPhone App: ChineseWeb 7.3.1
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
yelo (没有昵称) 于 (Thu Aug 2 08:53:28 2012, 美东) 提到:
此屄的统计101应该重修
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
ddheart (豆豆) 于 (Thu Aug 2 08:55:15 2012, 美东) 提到:
好样的，Lai Jiang!
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
irc (阿斗) 于 (Thu Aug 2 08:56:35 2012, 美东) 提到:
Sorry, there was an error fetching comments for this article.
评论close了？
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
st6 (maple) 于 (Thu Aug 2 08:58:11 2012, 美东) 提到:
截屏，没准儿一会儿给删了呢。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
wwhy000000 (laozheng) 于 (Thu Aug 2 09:01:32 2012, 美东) 提到:
真有牛人啊，回复的好啊
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
wwhy000000 (laozheng) 于 (Thu Aug 2 09:05:20 2012, 美东) 提到:
留在那里岂不是更好，让他们看看自己是如何自取其辱的，真丢人
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
NYwsn (NY Wall Street Nan) 于 (Thu Aug 2 09:14:00 2012, 美东) 提到:
牛 200伪币奉上 海外华人需要你这样的牛人
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
YuHuaShi (LittleApple) 于 (Thu Aug 2 09:15:32 2012, 美东) 提到:
Here is the email address of the SB author:
Ewen Callaway, Reporter, London
Ewen joined Nature in August 2010, after 2 years at New Scientist as Boston-
based biomedical reporter. He attended the science writing program at the
University of California, Santa Cruz and earned a masters degree in
microbiology at the University of Washington. He spends his free time
learning to bicycle on the left side of the road.
e********[email protected]
AND the SB Editor:
Brian Owens, Assistant News Editor, London
Brian joined Nature in 2011, after several years as a reporter and news
editor at Research Fortnight. He has a degree in biology from Queen's
University in Canada and a master's degree in science communication from
Imperial College London.
b*****[email protected]
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
megastop (megastop) 于 (Thu Aug 2 09:31:51 2012, 美东) 提到:
lz貌似是安徽人北大毕业在费城的搞化学的，赞！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
WorldCitizen (世界公民) 于 (Thu Aug 2 09:36:10 2012, 美东) 提到:
Anybody posted jianglai's comments here?
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
inergas (大坏猪) 于 (Thu Aug 2 09:37:09 2012, 美东) 提到:
2012-08-02 02:18 AM
Report this comment | #47487
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
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
’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 president’
;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&
#162;€œeveryone will pass at the Olympic games.
Hardly anyone fails in competition testingâ€&#
194;? 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
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Lizi (栗子) 于 (Thu Aug 2 09:40:37 2012, 美东) 提到:
膜拜英语……
其实评论里有人说的挺好，这就是一个新兴力量在崛起的过程中，所要经历的挑战。尤
其这个力量在过去一直都是弱小存在。作为过去曾经在人类历史上有过辉煌时期的国家
，在接受自己衰落这个现实的时候，是怎样的扭曲的心态……
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
goodapril (美好的四月) 于 (Thu Aug 2 09:41:29 2012, 美东) 提到:
这篇也很给力啊！
In light of the excellent analysis provided in the post by Lai Jiang (#47487
) and others, it is evident that the author/reporter did not do his homework
and cherry-picked data to support his false claim that Ye's performance was
anomalous.
"Everyone charged with a criminal offense shall be presumed innocent until
proved guilty according to law." It was a pity that the Press poured out
doubts on the achievement of an excellent young athlete. What a shame that
Nature published this piece of junk AFTER the IOC had proved that Ye was
innocent.
Nature should seriously consider retracting this news from its website.
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Qiutian (秋天) 于 (Thu Aug 2 09:48:26 2012, 美东) 提到:
这个编辑绝对有问题；这个回复里依然在字里行间暗示他的看法，比如最后刻意用
incredible win。
readers
and
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
MrAnderson (悠悠云影) 于 (Thu Aug 2 09:50:00 2012, 美东) 提到:
以后不要投Nature好了，改投science或者生物的话Cell也很好
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
inergas (大坏猪) 于 (Thu Aug 2 09:50:12 2012, 美东) 提到:
yeah, that's disgusting.
actually i think the author is more ignorant than biased. but the editor is
probably racially biased.
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Zeyimama (zeyimama) 于 (Thu Aug 2 09:51:58 2012, 美东) 提到:
弱弱的问一句，有办法抗议，让nature道歉吗？
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
jone81 (jone81) 于 (Thu Aug 2 09:52:43 2012, 美东) 提到:
ding!
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
vvWvv (知足常乐) 于 (Thu Aug 2 09:54:20 2012, 美东) 提到:
不知有没有评论指出，原文故意说叶破了世界记录。wr，事实是奥运会记录，这个差别
大家应该清楚。就是说这么不可思议，无法理解，超出人类超出女人极限，不服毒不可
达到的成绩其实仅仅是奥运会记录，谁的世界记录？外星人吗？
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Qiutian (秋天) 于 (Thu Aug 2 09:55:05 2012, 美东) 提到:
两个都是nature的人，估计是串通好的
is
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
emsct (123) 于 (Thu Aug 2 09:56:33 2012, 美东) 提到:
nature也能拿后50米比
没救了
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Qiutian (秋天) 于 (Thu Aug 2 09:56:33 2012, 美东) 提到:
400好象就是wr，200只是or
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
vvWvv (知足常乐) 于 (Thu Aug 2 10:00:15 2012, 美东) 提到:
you are right ,
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
gritan (gritan) 于 (Thu Aug 2 10:03:59 2012, 美东) 提到:
Zhenxi Zhang 和lz都写得非常好，谢谢你们！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
zhaowenda (突突突) 于 (Thu Aug 2 10:05:18 2012, 美东) 提到:
Ye's achievement is exceptional. However, compared to Phelps's 08
performance, no one can call Ye's as 'anomalous' while not for Phelps'.
Where's the fucking suspicion about Phelps' medals and record-breaking
performance?
A case can and should be made that this particular editor and author is
racially biased and we need to make every effort to let them pay for their
poor job, which is to loose their job or seriously apologize and retract the
article. This is the prize you pay for being ignorant while talking about
science, for being racially biased while pretending to be fair, for being
hypocritical while pretending to be honest, and for being stupid while
pretending to be intelligent.
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
sailor3745 (水手) 于 (Thu Aug 2 10:06:18 2012, 美东) 提到:
lz写的很好，辛苦了。向你致敬！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
frogzw (frog) 于 (Thu Aug 2 10:07:32 2012, 美东) 提到:
给编辑发email，要求书面道歉
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
gritan (gritan) 于 (Thu Aug 2 10:08:00 2012, 美东) 提到:
此外，我不觉得是美英堕落，而是他们再次展现了他们的丑陋而已，他们一向就这水平
啊。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
timigoo (Timigo) 于 (Thu Aug 2 10:10:14 2012, 美东) 提到:
啥nature science啊，都是工具罢了。在伟大的人和事，都是政治的棋子，被风光和被
丢弃。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
catrat (猫鼠一家) 于 (Thu Aug 2 10:11:34 2012, 美东) 提到:
看来这个editor根本没看你的comments, 真有脸说自己那是science
readers
and
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
aggressive (微尘) 于 (Thu Aug 2 10:16:57 2012, 美东) 提到:
Good job!
Jiang Lai, an excellent article!
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
desheng (你回来了~~) 于 (Thu Aug 2 10:16:58 2012, 美东) 提到:
美帝阴险，大阴蒂只是哈巴狗，
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
aggressive (微尘) 于 (Thu Aug 2 10:18:03 2012, 美东) 提到:
Jason OBoyle said:
To Brian Owens:
All the British are murders even we cannot prove it now. You know, there
are always ahead of the law.
We appreciate that accusing British people as murders is a sensitive one
for some readers. However, I would like to point out that this story was
not intended to insinuate that British are guilty of anything. As I point
out in the first paragraph, many British has never failed a criminal charge
and so is they are innocent.
I wanted to use the controversy as a way to highlight what science can
and can't tell us with respect to a person’s criminal
record. We have done similar stories before, for example in the case of a
non-British nation.
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
rabbit8 (兔子) 于 (Thu Aug 2 10:20:43 2012, 美东) 提到:
原文最后一段也很公道：
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.”
也称赞这种发文方式，读者可以加以评论。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
CEIS888 (基督山伯爵未雨绸缪) 于 (Thu Aug 2 10:21:36 2012, 美东) 提到:
Good job!
Thanks.
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
gooblue (gooblue) 于 (Thu Aug 2 10:23:18 2012, 美东) 提到:
发给他们的头，同时cc给其他科学界政界重要人物！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
vespers (西瓜很好吃) 于 (Thu Aug 2 10:30:28 2012, 美东) 提到:
这是编辑的回信？没有在网站上看到啊。
直接给主编写信吧，不要提种族的事情，就说这帮B统计学不及格，cherry pick data
，给nature蒙羞，让人怀疑整个nature的standard和credbility。
readers
and
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
jianglai (Veni, Vidi, Vici.) 于 (Thu Aug 2 10:33:46 2012, 美东) 提到:
编辑comment的，貌似自宫了。。。
data
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
hwh (hwh) 于 (Thu Aug 2 10:34:33 2012, 美东) 提到:
大赞楼主的评论！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
sloven (青丝秀发缘系百年) 于 (Thu Aug 2 10:40:47 2012, 美东) 提到:
我存了10年的500伪币，全转给你了。你太NB了！佩服！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
aggressive (微尘) 于 (Thu Aug 2 10:41:14 2012, 美东) 提到:
re
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
hopestorm (所欲随心) 于 (Thu Aug 2 10:41:23 2012, 美东) 提到:
Lai Jiang，Zhenxi Zhang Y. J Kung回答有理有据。
那个叫Hua Hua的就不要去骂人了吧。那样容易引起反感。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
mystic (魔界守护神) 于 (Thu Aug 2 10:42:21 2012, 美东) 提到:
那人只怕是无间道
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
BenW (Ben) 于 (Thu Aug 2 10:42:26 2012, 美东) 提到:
应该强烈要求主管编辑以及写报道的人resign. 就说这样的货，根本没有任何科学素养
，怎么为 nature 工作。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
neter (strongmike) 于 (Thu Aug 2 10:43:50 2012, 美东) 提到:
楼主的评论牛！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
huahuaniu (花牛) 于 (Thu Aug 2 10:44:04 2012, 美东) 提到:
赞，楼主写的好！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Morphea (scala & kolacny) 于 (Thu Aug 2 10:46:23 2012, 美东) 提到:
刚发现lz就是Lai Jiang，赞啊！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
lovelyfish (fish) 于 (Thu Aug 2 10:48:42 2012, 美东) 提到:
赞楼主，写得太好了！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
takumar (Takumar) 于 (Thu Aug 2 10:55:54 2012, 美东) 提到:
post 了一个comment
虽然比不上楼主，但也尽力
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
carbonfiber (碳纤维) 于 (Thu Aug 2 10:58:47 2012, 美东) 提到:
这事绝对应该搞大，把那个小编拉下来先
然后想法捅到别的媒体，包括大众传媒的层面
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
DaoDao (DaoDao) 于 (Thu Aug 2 10:59:35 2012, 美东) 提到:
这英语太牛b了！赞！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
emsct (123) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:00:16 2012, 美东) 提到:
这不叫cherry pick data吧
这简直就是弱智
八卦小报弱智一下也就算了
nature也跟着弱智。。。。
data
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Daos (刀丝) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:01:03 2012, 美东) 提到:
哪个大侠去美帝的Science上发篇驳斥的长文去
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
plainer (又是一年) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:01:53 2012, 美东) 提到:
Hat off to Jianglai.
Job well done! You are a hero.
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
freelong (花悦奴) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:02:34 2012, 美东) 提到:
天，Nature真的是令人发指啊。。。
还是一个学术杂志么？
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
shuiping (shuiping) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:07:53 2012, 美东) 提到:
兄弟，你真行~ 逻辑清晰，反驳有力，PFPF
大家都去支持，既然他们敢诬蔑，咱中国人就的回击。英语不好有啥关系，至少表态了
让他们知道中国随便他们诬蔑的时候已经过去了
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
yangtz (niuniu) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:08:08 2012, 美东) 提到:
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. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
有种到哈佛剑桥找个教授出来用学术声誉做担保。
这次奥运已经彻底变味了，每天都能整出点妖蛾子。让列强再意淫5-10年吧。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
FranklinDou (不是包子机器人) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:09:23 2012, 美东) 提到:
这种问题问哈佛剑桥的人家也没法保证
问这个问题本身就是耍无赖
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
SethI (昨天的世界) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:15:06 2012, 美东) 提到:
回復得真好，謝謝。
Nature Editors 都是普通人， 記憶中Nature news 還從來沒有給過中國science
positive 評論。
Ye的事情確實讓我們看到了西方人對中國人從骨頭里透出的歧視， 百年來從來沒有改
變過。
現在知道為啥在美國沒有美國朋友了。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Gilda (屠龙公主,好女不跟女斗) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:16:34 2012, 美东) 提到:
我回了，全文如下
Dear Editor:
I don't think people react to this merely because of the sensitive nature of
this article, as you pointed out in your reply of this whole issue.
It's in fact largely due to many fatal flaws of this article, which
potentially could ruin the reputation of Nature, as a prestigious scientific
publishing enterprise.
Yes, as you pointed out, the first paragraph did lay out the fact that Ye
was tested clean. However, to be honest, I'm afraid that's the only portion
of the entire article that was based on facts.
From the second paragraph, all the science and logic have started to fall
apart.
First, the term that Ye's record was "anomalous" was simply wrong. Numerous
historical records have indicated, that similar amount of advances had been
achieved by other swimmers, both by men and women, as several of my fellow
commenters pointed out.
Putting forward a imprudent judgment with such a firm tone without simple
literature review, is extremely unprofessional for anyone in the science
community, in publishing industry, and not to say, in scientific publishing.
Researching an area before commenting, is a basic training in Scientific
Writing 101. How regrettable it is, that a contributor of Nature showed a
lack of such an essential education.
Second, the author twisted Dr. Tucker's comments, and put his more important
general comment, which is "performance couldn't be the verdict of doping"
at the very end and treated it like it was unimportant.
This caused huge bias, to the extent that facts have been manipulated.
I don't think Dr. Tucker himself would like to be quoted this way. Twisting
the interviewee's comments and spliced them in an artful way to mislead the
audience, is not uncommon in paparazzi coverage and entertainment magazine.
However, this style is not so appropriate for Nature. It will discourage
other scientists to be interviewed.
Scientists certainly don't desire their intention and results, being
attacked for reasons outside science.
Thirdly, the entire article doesn't have any statistics to back itself up:
how strongly excellent performance correlate with doping? That was
very surprising, given the reader's education level.
By the way, I 'd like to point out that, the links of the references at the
bottom don't work. Please check and make sure. Some readers will check the
original reference, since this is a prerequisite for most of us.
Finally, I'd like to point out my personal understanding of nature, if I may
class.
An female beats a male under certain circumstances, especially for stamina,
is not a huge fault but an wonder, in nature's own eye. Like all the great
things women can do nowadays.
Thank you very much and I hope the editors could seriously consider remove
the article and post a formal apology.
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
iminusc (布衣王二) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:17:46 2012, 美东) 提到:
赞楼主，写得太好了！忍不住爬上去说了几句。
这俩人根本不配做SCIENCE，有人建议的好，让他们赶紧发简历找工作，去娱乐界混比
在NATURE有前途。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
openxy (open) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:22:49 2012, 美东) 提到:
好！
of
scientific
portion
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
mystic (魔界守护神) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:24:03 2012, 美东) 提到:
很不错，不过应该考虑按照楼下的email发给nature editor in chief和feedback的邮箱
发给作者本人影响力不够大
http://mitbbs.com/article1/Olympics/31613079_3_0.html
of
scientific
portion
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
legendcx (legendcx) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:24:59 2012, 美东) 提到:
zan!!!!!!!!!!!
of
scientific
portion
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
email5030 (5030) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:25:07 2012, 美东) 提到:
美国队那个17岁高中姑娘不是也两枚金牌吗？而且中间还只休息了14分钟，巨牛。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Gilda (屠龙公主,好女不跟女斗) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:26:52 2012, 美东) 提到:
哪个email？ 我能google到吗？
邮箱
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Gilda (屠龙公主,好女不跟女斗) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:27:55 2012, 美东) 提到:
看到了，马上发
邮箱
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
mystic (魔界守护神) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:28:16 2012, 美东) 提到:
发信人: cashback (bing), 信区: Olympics
标 题: Nature这事很严重，必须有点行动
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Aug 2 11:18:10 2012, 美东)
http://www.nature.com/news/why-great-olympic-feats-raise-suspic
Nature发这种垃圾，不仅是侮辱中国人，也是侮辱整个science community。
这个作者学了个MS学位，完全没有一丁点科学素养。
Ewen Callaway, Reporter, London
Ewen joined Nature in August 2010, after 2 years at New Scientist as Boston-
based biomedical reporter. He attended the science writing program at the
University of California, Santa Cruz and earned a masters degree in
microbiology at the University of Washington. He spends his free time
learning to bicycle on the left side of the road.
e********[email protected]
大家应该发信给Nature Editor-in-Chief Philip Campbell (p********[email protected])
，让这个垃圾滚蛋。
London Office email address: f******[email protected]
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
openxy (open) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:28:50 2012, 美东) 提到:
Zhenxi Zhang， Lai Jiang， Gilda等的文章都应该在正式的nature期刊上发表
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
dolphinwen (小海豚) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:29:24 2012, 美东) 提到:
谁给转生物斑,我好久不灌水了,不记得怎么转了.
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
vespers (西瓜很好吃) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:30:52 2012, 美东) 提到:
这是我写的。
Dear Dr. XXX and Dr. XXX,
It's very disappointed to see Nature, a world most-renowned scientific
journal to publish such a biased article in its online news section. As a
well-trained scientist and a regular contributor and reviewer to ACS and RSC
, the low scientific standard of this article is astonishing to me. It
presented cherry-picked data and based the whole theory on two pieces of
questionable evidence (This is clearly presented in the comment from Lai
Jiang, and I wouldn't repeat them here to save some your precious time). It
is like to publish a research article on Nature with only two data points,
and even these two data points are hand-picked with dozens of other data
points being intentionally omitted. While this topic is definitely very
interesting and I can completely see the needs of publishing such an article
quickly in time, it is not an excuse for the data fabrication and mis-
interpretation.
What is even more astonishing to me is the comment from the editor Brian
Owens, which doesn't seem to grasp the essence of the critical comment at
all. He simply treated it as the overall sensitiveness from Chinese
community, and didn't realize the fundamental scientific problem of the
article. His attitude is not only arrogant and racism, but put a very big
question mark on his scientific training and his ability as a scientific new
editor. I would certainly not want him to be my editor next time when I
submit my article to Nature. The quality of Nature is highly depended on its
editor group, especially for the news section, where the peer-review
process is missing. This incident would cast enormous doubt about the
scientific accuracy of the Nature news and would take months and years to
clear. Now when people read Nature news, it will be very natural for them to
think if there is anything else behind the curtain, and if the reporter has
presented the whole truth without any intentionally omitting.
In summary, I am very sorry to see such a low-standard scientific news
appeared in Nature, and would hope the editor group at Nature would make the
right decision.
of
scientific
portion
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
whipple (死猪不怕开水烫，空手夺大刀) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:34:31 2012, 美东) 提到:
很多很好的comments，但也看到一些中国人的帖子，满腔怒火，不知道怎么合理反击，
类似下面这种真的比较糟糕
Nature, your mum asks you to have dinner!! What a shame!!
Dear Mr. Callaway, I don't blame you for your shallow knowledge of
statistics, since you are just holding a master degree, and westerners are
usually not good in math anyway.
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
hytt (荷叶田田) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:34:47 2012, 美东) 提到:
真棒！有理有节！英文真好！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
whipple (死猪不怕开水烫，空手夺大刀) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:36:53 2012, 美东) 提到:
很多很好的comments，但也看到一些中国人的帖子，满腔怒火，不知道怎么合理反击，
类似下面这种真的比较糟糕
Nature, your mum asks you to have dinner!! What a shame!!
Dear Mr. Callaway, I don't blame you for your shallow knowledge of
statistics, since you are just holding a master degree, and westerners are
usually not good in math anyway.
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
lateleo (lateleo) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:38:28 2012, 美东) 提到:
除了您的回复，这个回复也亮了：
Laura Kleiman said:
I am sending emails to the Editor-in-Chief and Executive Editor and all
other editors I can find. Very soon Nature will be changed into a gossip
tabloid. At the same time, I would seriously suggest that Mr. Callaway and
Mr. Owens changing their career paths. Trust me, science is not for you guys
. You should send our your resumes right now before bringing more
humiliation to the scientific community. Rupert Murdoch may give you higher
salaries.
Laura, Ph.D, even though I have no publication on Nature, I am a real
scientist and I am proud of both facts.
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Gilda (屠龙公主,好女不跟女斗) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:38:34 2012, 美东) 提到:
I sent it to their emails as well ~~
Thank all the commenters for the info.
Yours is great !
RSC
It
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
openxy (open) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:39:23 2012, 美东) 提到:
Good idea!
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
shouji (apocalypsetank) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:40:41 2012, 美东) 提到:
版主给楼主发几个包子吧，写得非常好
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
dolphinwen (小海豚) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:41:08 2012, 美东) 提到:
顶这个,一篇science呀.........!
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
NewEngland (iMac) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:41:24 2012, 美东) 提到:
editor-in-chief外出，8月21号才回来。这里是他的auto reply。请大家用这里的
email （当然还是要cc editor-in-chief）：
I am out of the office, and only intermittently online. I shall be back in
the office on Tuesday 21 August. For urgent queries, contact Diane Yorke, d.
y***[email protected], or Roseann Campbell, r********[email protected].
Boston-
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
ydzhang (包子铺老板) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:41:49 2012, 美东) 提到:
建议大家投诉此文章。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
shuiping (shuiping) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:41:55 2012, 美东) 提到:
怎么发不了回复了？显示
Errors prevented your comment being submitted, please try again
Sorry, there was a technical error while trying to submit your comment
Sorry, there was an error fetching comments for this article.
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
lateleo (lateleo) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:42:08 2012, 美东) 提到:
没什么不好
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
ljx (LJX) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:42:49 2012, 美东) 提到:
顶楼主！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
GMs (GS+MS=GMs) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:42:54 2012, 美东) 提到:
Can't not see comments le
"
Comments
Sorry, there was an error fetching comments for this article."
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
gipelttil (TTILOVEU) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:43:29 2012, 美东) 提到:
关键字了吧哈哈
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
shuiping (shuiping) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:44:53 2012, 美东) 提到:
考，甚至连我的帐号都给踢出来了，再也进不去了，WTF，言论自由？！
Login concurrency exceeded: please email Customer Services.
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
MicroSurface (e&e) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:46:07 2012, 美东) 提到:
what the fuck! the comments are not accessible any more!
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
openxy (open) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:46:23 2012, 美东) 提到:
赞！
RSC
It
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Satine (呆瓜小贼~~奔过~~) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:47:54 2012, 美东) 提到:
我网页没关，所有评论还在
可否把他们下载下来，发给他们老板
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
ydzhang (包子铺老板) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:50:14 2012, 美东) 提到:
截屏，发给国内媒体
发他们老板有屁用。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
qfql (waaa) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:54:36 2012, 美东) 提到:
多谢楼主的回复。nature也成了御用的了。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Anne (day day up) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:54:43 2012, 美东) 提到:
赞lz还有其他发评论的人
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
sivgag (ww) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:55:20 2012, 美东) 提到:
和他们讨论数据之类的没有用，要给编辑写信，重点要说明这篇文章涉及种族歧视，不
然他们不会重视。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
maoqiumina (maoba) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:55:27 2012, 美东) 提到:
这个一定要顶，楼主英文和学术水平都让人佩服。
把原文和楼主回复发回国去是个好主意，揭露一下虚伪的洋人。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Nehalem (Nehalem) 于 (Thu Aug 2 11:57:32 2012, 美东) 提到:
不用谈种族歧视，就说这个文章全是臆测，科学素质太差
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
sivgag (ww) 于 (Thu Aug 2 12:04:06 2012, 美东) 提到:
这个根本就不是科学性质的文章，就是为了吸引眼球的，去谈有无科学素质他们不会
care.不提高到种族歧视的高度，编辑们也不会意识到问题的严重性。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
cleveri (己所不欲，勿施于人) 于 (Thu Aug 2 12:05:22 2012, 美东) 提到:
感谢楼主！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
vespers (西瓜很好吃) 于 (Thu Aug 2 12:06:06 2012, 美东) 提到:
各人有各人想法，大家都写自己的，批判科学性，种族歧视的都有，百花齐放挺好的。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Rambleon (rambleon) 于 (Thu Aug 2 12:06:15 2012, 美东) 提到:
楼主的回复真是牛文！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
biok (流氓免·不要客) 于 (Thu Aug 2 12:06:19 2012, 美东) 提到:
超赞楼主！！！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
dengy (毛轮有老婆) 于 (Thu Aug 2 12:08:02 2012, 美东) 提到:
楼主评论十分到位，5个包子献上。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
dengy (毛轮有老婆) 于 (Thu Aug 2 12:08:15 2012, 美东) 提到:
楼主评论十分到位，5个包子献上。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
hexieNo1 (还算WSN) 于 (Thu Aug 2 12:17:37 2012, 美东) 提到:
楼主写得很好.
这个Nature只是网上部分吧,要是真把那小子的"文章"登出来就太掉价了.
大老板不在,有人要搞小动作.
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
hapalosin (丁丁爸) 于 (Thu Aug 2 12:24:03 2012, 美东) 提到:
赞 jianglai
你是我的偶像
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
cashback (bing) 于 (Thu Aug 2 12:26:39 2012, 美东) 提到:
网上部分跟hard copy有什么区别？只怕看到的人更多
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
shenhai (深海) 于 (Thu Aug 2 12:27:31 2012, 美东) 提到:
thanks to jianglai
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
goodapril (美好的四月) 于 (Thu Aug 2 12:32:19 2012, 美东) 提到:
现在还有谁看hardcopy？
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
taro (可回收绿色芋头) 于 (Thu Aug 2 12:40:56 2012, 美东) 提到:
顶一个， 垃圾 Nature, lost my respect!
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
MMT007 (踏雪寻梅) 于 (Thu Aug 2 12:46:27 2012, 美东) 提到:
Send emails to complain and request the Nature to fire those disqualified.
Let's do it.
I will send mine right away.
We should also point it out clearly what loss Nature will have if it refuses
to apologize and fire the people who do not have the capability to get
their job done in the right way.
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
GUXBO (gxb) 于 (Thu Aug 2 12:49:42 2012, 美东) 提到:
老大，我转发了开心网，不介意吧
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
hunger (hunger) 于 (Thu Aug 2 13:01:46 2012, 美东) 提到:
你是我的偶像，幸亏你发现啦。
建议大家以后少往nature投文章。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
goddess (仙姑~姐说的话都是神话) 于 (Thu Aug 2 13:10:08 2012, 美东) 提到:
Sorry, there was an error fetching comments for this article.
不让我comment, 不知道为什么
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
simmon (青鸟.心如止水) 于 (Thu Aug 2 13:10:38 2012, 美东) 提到:
赞楼主！！！！
写的很好很好！！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
andysun (nn) 于 (Thu Aug 2 13:11:26 2012, 美东) 提到:
英鬼怕了，妨碍言论自由，哈哈
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
silangjia (家有两千金) 于 (Thu Aug 2 13:19:04 2012, 美东) 提到:
这种事要桶到Nature的竞争对手，如Science，Cell那里。他们肯定很乐意来搞搞
nature的reputation的
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
lzhflzhf (lzhflzhf) 于 (Thu Aug 2 13:34:03 2012, 美东) 提到:
写得真好
这样的一些评论应该要求独立成文，作为反驳文章。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
zimmer (zimmer) 于 (Thu Aug 2 13:39:45 2012, 美东) 提到:
赞楼主写的评论，有理、有据、有节。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Longislander (littledog) 于 (Thu Aug 2 13:44:53 2012, 美东) 提到:
Who wrote this? It is so funny
2012-08-02 01:34 AM
Report this comment | #47682
Publishing in Science said:
Why you guys are so surprised to see such an article in Nature? Compared
to Cell and Science, it is obvious that the Nature Editors are easily
fooled and manipulated. Now we could tease those published in Nature with
one more joke: Are your results based on scientific evidence or "Performance
profiling"?
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
moonflower7 (teddybearmom) 于 (Thu Aug 2 13:49:24 2012, 美东) 提到:
Apparently they have blocked all incoming comments.
We need to write to the editor-in-chief directly.
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
linshuhao12 (lin) 于 (Thu Aug 2 13:53:42 2012, 美东) 提到:
我已经给editor 写信了
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
jianglai (Veni, Vidi, Vici.) 于 (Thu Aug 2 13:53:50 2012, 美东) 提到:
刚抽空看了一眼，副标题从"Performance profiling" could help to catch cheaters
in sports改成了'Performance profiling' could help to dispel doubts.
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
YanShouYi (有一说一) 于 (Thu Aug 2 13:55:43 2012, 美东) 提到:
有截屏证据保留么
cheaters
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
jianglai (Veni, Vidi, Vici.) 于 (Thu Aug 2 13:57:59 2012, 美东) 提到:
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
atwood (aries-haunter) 于 (Thu Aug 2 13:59:59 2012, 美东) 提到:
给主编发信了
Dear Dr. Philip Campbell,
It was very disappointing to see that Nature, which is one of the most
prestigious journals, published the biased comment from editor Ewen Callaway
questioning the great Olympic performance by ShiWen Ye.
As a frequent reader of Nature, I was astonished to find this article
published on Nature website http://www.nature.com/news/why-great-olympic-feats-raise-suspicions-1.11109. The way editor Ewen Callaway talked in the article, combined with his ignorant scientific mind and lacking of statistic training, really lowere
standard of articles published by Nature. I was also amazed by the comments provided by editor Brian
Owens, who obviously does not have the ability to understand the essence of
other readers' comments, treating the whole thing as an over reaction from
sensitive readers. The truth is, this type of comments and views does not
fit the well renowned Scientific journal status which Nature editorial group
have been working really hard to achieve and maintain. Articles like this
should be removed from Nature website; editor Ewen Callaway, editor Brian
Owens should be re-evaluated about their ability to contribute as editors
for Nature publishing group. Nature does own an apology to Shiwen Ye for
this biased accusation and an apology to all the readers for allowing this
type of article published on Nature website.
Sincerely,
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
canneylin (miaomiao) 于 (Thu Aug 2 14:07:02 2012, 美东) 提到:
同志们，去twitter reply作者吧~
这里是这个sb的twitter account
http://twitter.ie/ewencallaway
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Herzog (singularity) 于 (Thu Aug 2 14:07:54 2012, 美东) 提到:
你的回复非常好，堪称典范。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
bernoulli07 (berny) 于 (Thu Aug 2 14:12:48 2012, 美东) 提到:
e********[email protected]
那个人的email
大家一起发信反驳他啊
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Propus (Beautiful Loser) 于 (Thu Aug 2 14:15:44 2012, 美东) 提到:
副标题应该是被改过了，不过一些引用/转发nature的网站上依然是“Performance
profiling' could help to catch cheaters in sport”。
Scientific American 网上的副标题是'Performance profiling' could help catch
athletes who use banned performance-enhancing drugs。参见：http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=why-great-olympic-feats-raise-suspicions
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
xiaobenmao (水晶瓶子) 于 (Thu Aug 2 14:45:40 2012, 美东) 提到:
lz就是下面comment里面的Lai Jiang么？狂顶楼主！！！你太棒了！！！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
kissykissy (kissykissy) 于 (Thu Aug 2 14:47:27 2012, 美东) 提到:
lz牛！谨献上10个包子，以示敬意！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
ostrakon (ostrakon) 于 (Thu Aug 2 14:56:44 2012, 美东) 提到:
你的回复写得真赞！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
xiuaoka (卖身养家) 于 (Thu Aug 2 14:58:16 2012, 美东) 提到:
这算不算Nature的发表阿？赫赫
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
friend (朋友啊朋友) 于 (Thu Aug 2 15:02:46 2012, 美东) 提到:
日落底国的小丑理他做甚啊。
向Zhenxi Zhang致敬：非常有利的反驳！
看到下面：也向你致敬！！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
loganfreeman (logan) 于 (Thu Aug 2 15:04:05 2012, 美东) 提到:
LZ太牛了。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
A95627 (95627) 于 (Thu Aug 2 15:06:27 2012, 美东) 提到:
大家发邮件抗议吧
e********[email protected]
那个大牛能写一个模板，大家发爆他的邮箱
还有
Editor-in-Chief
Philip Campbell
p********[email protected]
Executive Editor
Nick Campbell
n********[email protected]
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
kkl (I am here) 于 (Thu Aug 2 15:12:23 2012, 美东) 提到:
建议给所有的主编发， 同时cc 那两个SB。重点强调事关杂志的名声和影响力。
Nature online editor-in-chief:
a************[email protected]
Nature editor-in-chief (probably on vacation till Aug 21):
p********[email protected]
Dr. Campbell's assistants when absence:
Diane Yorke, d*****[email protected]
Roseann Campbell, r********[email protected].
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
A95627 (95627) 于 (Thu Aug 2 15:24:08 2012, 美东) 提到:
ding
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
syong (新手) 于 (Thu Aug 2 15:38:21 2012, 美东) 提到:
回得真好！超赞！！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
eca (eca) 于 (Thu Aug 2 15:41:09 2012, 美东) 提到:
Well done LZ!
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
expire7 (汉家儿郎) 于 (Thu Aug 2 15:47:49 2012, 美东) 提到:
很少回帖。不过的确要感谢各位努力回击的同胞！你们太赞了！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
YuHuaShi (LittleApple) 于 (Thu Aug 2 15:55:04 2012, 美东) 提到:
LZ回得真好！
Emailed to the editors already!
就应该跟Nature投诉，把这种垃圾文章撤掉！就是要塞爆他们的邮箱！！
The comment and letter from Lin Zhou below is also a good one: concise and
right to the point!
2012-08-02 03:27 AM
Report this comment | #47748
Lin Zhou said: I strongly urge the Nature editors take this matter seriously
. This article should be retracted immediately and Nature should apologize
for the damages it has caused (this article has already been quoted by other
western media to mislead the public), both to Ye Shiwen and to the loyal
readers who want to find science, not bias, prejudice, and ignorance on your
website. The author and handling editor of this article should be held
responsible; they either lack the required scientific training to work for
Nature, or more seriously, are racist in the name of science. We will
contact (and have contacted) the editor-in-chief, and bring this to the
attention to the Chinese media and community. This article has severely
damaged the reputation of Nature, not only insulted the 16 year old girl
herself, but also humiliated the entire scientific community.
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
herosect (ZZ) 于 (Thu Aug 2 16:14:06 2012, 美东) 提到:
e xin
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
papai (不要拍不要拍) 于 (Thu Aug 2 16:16:04 2012, 美东) 提到:
樓主有去評論？寫得很好啊。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
pacific (hh) 于 (Thu Aug 2 16:17:04 2012, 美东) 提到:
pacific，您好：
您转给 jianglai,现金(伪币):200,收取手续费:2
同时附加了如下留言给 jianglai.
good job!
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
SuperKO (王子睡颜) 于 (Thu Aug 2 16:24:59 2012, 美东) 提到:
回复都非常赞，有大国phd之风！看Nature这个态度，平时审文章什么的估计也没少欺
负中国人吧
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
bloomer (mm) 于 (Thu Aug 2 16:27:44 2012, 美东) 提到:
楼主和不少同胞回复的很好，谢谢了！
很难想象 Nature 竟然让这样的文章发表，作者是个才毕业不久的微生物硕士，写些大
肠杆菌污染之类的科普就行了，有什么资格写这样的文章。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
lidaof (卢瑟一枚) 于 (Thu Aug 2 16:31:15 2012, 美东) 提到:
re
楼主回复太好了
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
brownmilk (brownmilk) 于 (Thu Aug 2 16:59:36 2012, 美东) 提到:
lz回复的超好，辛苦了！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
riancy (蝴蝶~~飞越沧海之我行我素) 于 (Thu Aug 2 17:04:31 2012, 美东) 提到:
co停水n年..上来顶下楼主!
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
shorea (未注册用户) 于 (Thu Aug 2 17:08:34 2012, 美东) 提到:
顶一下
认真附议，是不是真的可以向science去捅一捅？
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
YuHuaShi (LittleApple) 于 (Thu Aug 2 17:10:25 2012, 美东) 提到:
不错！Nature 网站上已有345留言！绝大部分是我们的同胞！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
yuanmeng (圆梦) 于 (Thu Aug 2 17:13:49 2012, 美东) 提到:
顶， 楼主给力啊
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
jimmykk22 (Jimmy) 于 (Thu Aug 2 17:18:23 2012, 美东) 提到:
可惜别人不care，Nature News刚刚还在他们的微博推荐了这篇文章
原作者也很嚣张
还是需要有分量的华人站出来说话才行
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
paperdu (往生极乐) 于 (Thu Aug 2 17:22:28 2012, 美东) 提到:
膜拜一下楼主！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
water77 (水) 于 (Thu Aug 2 17:37:30 2012, 美东) 提到:
你的回复很有才。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
ffviii (当当当) 于 (Thu Aug 2 17:39:33 2012, 美东) 提到:
PHD回复MS，水平高下立现
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
HCBresson (总参2部2局招待所副所长) 于 (Thu Aug 2 17:45:21 2012, 美东) 提到:
同意，我觉得这个事情要进一步行动了，要联合国内有影响力的科学家，
还有在英国，美国的华人学者，一起抗议，
直到这个人工作搞掉为止。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
jimmykk22 (Jimmy) 于 (Thu Aug 2 17:47:05 2012, 美东) 提到:
Nature的Editor都公开在他的twitter上嘲笑我们的留言了 https://twitter.com/
noahWG
得找有影响力的人了。另外，尽量还是不要搞人身攻击，省得给他们把柄
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
cashback (bing) 于 (Thu Aug 2 17:49:34 2012, 美东) 提到:
网民的发言他也没法怎么样，关键还是要搞他们的工作，需要有份量的人出来。
现在他们找了个中国运动员当target，肆无忌惮。如果是针对别的运动员，早就被搞残了
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
agenhcx (agenhcx) 于 (Thu Aug 2 17:49:49 2012, 美东) 提到:
This reply is also good:
I earned my PhD degree in statistics from a top-tier university and used to
teach statistics. I hate to say but I would certainly fail you if your were
my student. Based on her performance, Ms Ye was asked directly if she took
drugs. Well, let me ask you an outright but legit question as well based on
your performance, Mr. Ewen Callaway. Did you ever CHEAT to pass your
Statistics 101 exam?
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
SkullStrip (SS) 于 (Thu Aug 2 18:03:25 2012, 美东) 提到:
超级赞Lai Jiang的comment！！！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
HCBresson (总参2部2局招待所副所长) 于 (Thu Aug 2 18:08:19 2012, 美东) 提到:
好是好，现在关键是不当回事。
我觉得大家要联合署名给chief editor，
如果不作出处理，以后大家再也不投nature。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
johnnyz (蛋炒饭) 于 (Thu Aug 2 18:09:32 2012, 美东) 提到:
好像nature的comments数量总数有限，早起的comments都没有了？
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
myohmy (熊啊~~) 于 (Thu Aug 2 18:19:06 2012, 美东) 提到:
http://network.nature.com/profile/noah
那个写文章的和那个online news editor水平低下也就算了
这人还是有phd的做过千老的，纯来恶心人的
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
h11826 (hamburger) 于 (Thu Aug 2 18:24:09 2012, 美东) 提到:
好像那个神comment被删了。。。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
sandme (三得米) 于 (Thu Aug 2 18:27:09 2012, 美东) 提到:
国内相关人士和媒体不作为，就是白搭。中国人好了伤疤忘了痛，不是一天两天的事。
一个星期后，大家还是把Nature捧的比天高。
如果这事能让Nature道歉或是相关人员免职，咱把包子发完。建议大家都给nature@
nature.com发抗议信。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
saturnsaturn (土星) 于 (Thu Aug 2 18:35:15 2012, 美东) 提到:
这个叫noah gray的猪头，看照片就给人想吐的感觉，TMD这些Twitter更是赤裸裸的种
族主义言论。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
daysophia (天行健，君子以自强不息) 于 (Thu Aug 2 18:36:26 2012, 美东) 提到:
应该把这事捅到媒体上去，强烈要求道歉和正名。
谁认识人的给媒体爆个料啊？
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
momoshuihan (momoshuihan) 于 (Thu Aug 2 18:37:25 2012, 美东) 提到:
现在Nature的Scientific Editor Noah Gray都出来开始comment说这是一篇news，不是
scientific article。搞笑，大家对Nature的期望能跟别的娱乐八卦杂志一样么。
Nature是个形象和象征，Nature news大家期盼的也是有见地，insightful和logical的
报道和评论。再说了，尼玛这篇能叫news么，这篇明明是commentary啊。哦，不是peer
review的文章难道就可以跟其他娱乐媒体的报道如出一辙了？人云亦云了？连举的例
子尼玛还都是罗切特那个用了一遍又一遍，一点儿新的引用和数据都没有。你丫好歹是
Nature的Reporter，一点儿严谨态度都没有。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
moneybull (moneybull) 于 (Thu Aug 2 18:37:48 2012, 美东) 提到:
peer
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
canghai (沧海) 于 (Thu Aug 2 18:37:50 2012, 美东) 提到:
No, Nature is a magazine, not a journal.
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
romenty (luobo) 于 (Thu Aug 2 18:53:50 2012, 美东) 提到:
楼主你的评论被删了....你再去贴一遍吧～
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
bluecamery (天蓝) 于 (Thu Aug 2 18:54:47 2012, 美东) 提到:
shame
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
bloomer (mm) 于 (Thu Aug 2 18:56:11 2012, 美东) 提到:
看了这个NG的评论，纯粹狡辩。不管是news，还是scientific article，尊重事实是最
基本的。
看看这个： “ 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 ”， 短短一句，就把5秒变成7
秒， 而且故意不说是“July 2011”让人误认为叶的成绩一个月就提高了7秒。
peer
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
daysophia (天行健，君子以自强不息) 于 (Thu Aug 2 18:58:05 2012, 美东) 提到:
居然会删文？nature也太2了……
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
sticklyy (stick) 于 (Thu Aug 2 19:01:19 2012, 美东) 提到:
lz的评论找不到了。能不能再贴一次啊？
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
BlcHumor (娘子等我) 于 (Thu Aug 2 19:04:08 2012, 美东) 提到:
NM,nature也这么堕落啊！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
BlcHumor (娘子等我) 于 (Thu Aug 2 19:05:14 2012, 美东) 提到:
LZ 的神文：
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
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
?￠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 president?￠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 ?￠a???“everyone will pass at the
Olympic games. Hardly anyone fails in competition testing?￠a????? 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
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
viamedia (Mens conscia recti) 于 (Thu Aug 2 19:06:54 2012, 美东) 提到:
这个强顶
要闹大
内，外都要闹大
the
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
chace (E.T.) 于 (Thu Aug 2 19:14:05 2012, 美东) 提到:
re
her
7
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
chace (E.T.) 于 (Thu Aug 2 19:15:13 2012, 美东) 提到:
楼主你再去贴一遍吧!
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
edogawakyo (edo) 于 (Thu Aug 2 21:13:50 2012, 美东) 提到:
膜拜LZ，无论是英文水平还是学术严谨程度，还是逻辑性甩那个作者两个光年啊！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
xuxiaoyao (小妖) 于 (Thu Aug 2 21:14:44 2012, 美东) 提到:
叶诗文起码还通过了药检，Nature 文章editor都没有重复过，是不是就此可以推断，
nature上的文章都有问题？
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Acartia (深水鱼) 于 (Thu Aug 2 21:16:09 2012, 美东) 提到:
新闻的部分比较有问题
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
nrzsc (蜘蛛侠) 于 (Thu Aug 2 21:25:36 2012, 美东) 提到:
楼主英语太牛逼了，膜拜
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
tunpipi (tuntun) 于 (Thu Aug 2 21:54:43 2012, 美东) 提到:
同膜拜
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
BlackA (黑A) 于 (Thu Aug 2 22:03:53 2012, 美东) 提到:
ding
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
yuxiaohong (unique) 于 (Thu Aug 2 22:14:37 2012, 美东) 提到:
Lai Jiang's article is super good. Can Dr. Lai convert this article to a
rebuttal letter and send to Nature formally?
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
yuxiaohong (unique) 于 (Thu Aug 2 22:17:43 2012, 美东) 提到:
We, Chinese, need to raise our voice and take an action to request that
editor to resign from "Nature".
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
yuxiaohong (unique) 于 (Thu Aug 2 22:25:02 2012, 美东) 提到:
Great article. I envy you. I wish I could write such a wonderful article.
of
scientific
portion
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
yuxiaohong (unique) 于 (Thu Aug 2 22:32:03 2012, 美东) 提到:
Super. Excellect job. Please send to the Editor-in-Chief of Nature.
RSC
It
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
haywardman (Justin) 于 (Thu Aug 2 22:33:24 2012, 美东) 提到:
膜拜
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
yuxiaohong (unique) 于 (Thu Aug 2 22:42:20 2012, 美东) 提到:
Niu! Support!
Callaway
he standard of articles published by Nature. I was also amazed by the comments provided by editor Brian
of
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
flyingflower (猫) 于 (Thu Aug 2 22:51:46 2012, 美东) 提到:
"It's not classy at all to say that record-breakers have taken drugs. It's
just jealousy," wrote one user. Another post said: "She's just a child. Don'
t be so beastly to her."
Triple jumper Jonathan Edwards pointed out that he set a world record at 17
GB Olympic bronze medal winning swimmer Cassie Patten also told Sky News: "
They have just branded her as a drugs cheat. It makes me very angry.
"She won the World Championships last year, she was ranked second in the
world. She's not a new swimmer who has just come out of nowhere."
Olympic triple jump gold medallist Jonathan Edwards took to Twitter to
express his concern.
The former GB champion wrote: "Forgive personal reference, but my WR 17 yrs
old and never been doubted. If my nationality was different?? Point: if I
can, anyone can."
He added: "In a country as populous as China, untapped potential mind
blowing. Ye Shiwen may simple be Beijing legacy #InspireAGeneration."
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
sequel (暴力云) 于 (Thu Aug 2 22:53:14 2012, 美东) 提到:
顶楼主。要不要联名写信给主编啊？
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
gritan (gritan) 于 (Thu Aug 2 22:58:25 2012, 美东) 提到:
支持！
但是我觉得应该提种族，因为他们似乎害怕种族歧视的帽子。何况这就是反映了他们种
族歧视，当然要说出来。
data
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
flyingflower (猫) 于 (Thu Aug 2 23:00:41 2012, 美东) 提到:
http://news.sky.com/story/967067/chinas-ye-shiwen-bags-second-g
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
flyingflower (猫) 于 (Thu Aug 2 23:03:22 2012, 美东) 提到:
nature怎么成了小报了，一点没有治学精神，严谨态度。nature要给叶诗文道歉，编辑
应该不但道歉而且要官方正式致歉。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
sequel (暴力云) 于 (Thu Aug 2 23:03:22 2012, 美东) 提到:
写得非常好啊。直接发信给主编吧。
I don't think people react to this merely because of the sensitive nature of
this article, as you pointed out in your reply of this whole issue.
It's in fact largely due to many fatal flaws of this article, which
potentially could ruin the reputation of Nature, as a prestigious scientific
publishing enterprise.
Yes, as you pointed out, the first paragraph did lay out the fact that Ye
was tested clean. However, to be honest, I'm afraid that's the only portion
of the entire article that was based on facts.
From the second paragraph, all the science and logic have started to fall
apart.
First, the term that Ye's record was "anomalous" was simply wrong. Numerous
historical records have indicated, that similar amount of advances had been
achieved by other swimmers, both by men and women, as several of my fellow
commenters pointed out.
Putting forward a imprudent judgment with such a firm tone without simple
literature review, is extremely unprofessional for anyone in the science
community, in publishing industry, and not to say, in scientific publishing.
Researching an area before commenting, is a basic training in Scientific
Writing 101. How regrettable it is, that a contributor of Nature showed a
lack of such an essential education.
Second, the author twisted Dr. Tucker's comments, and put his more important
general comment, which is "performance couldn't be the verdict of doping"at
the very end and treated it like it was unimportant.
This caused huge bias, to the extent that facts have been manipulated.
I don't think Dr. Tucker himself would like to be quoted this way. Twisting
the interviewee's comments and spliced them in an artful way to mislead the
audience, is not uncommon in paparazzi coverage and entertainment magazine.
However, this style is not so appropriate for Nature. It will discourage
other scientists to be interviewed.
Scientists certainly don't desire their intention and results, being
attacked for reasons outside science.
Thirdly, the entire article doesn't have any statistics to back itself up:
how strongly excellent performance correlate with doping? That was very
surprising, given the reader's education level.
By the way, I 'd like to point out that, the links of the references at the
bottom don't work. Please check and make sure. Some readers will check the
original reference, since this is a prerequisite for most of us.
Finally, I'd like to point out my personal understanding of nature, if I may
class.
An female beats a male under certain circumstances, especially for stamina,
is not a huge fault but an wonder, in nature's own eye. Like all the great
things women can do nowadays.
Thank you very much and I hope the editors could seriously consider remove
the article and post a formal apology.
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
ultidream (Newer) 于 (Thu Aug 2 23:04:02 2012, 美东) 提到:
大家都英文都贼好
of
scientific
portion
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
sequel (暴力云) 于 (Thu Aug 2 23:04:48 2012, 美东) 提到:
而且思路清晰
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
clever (micky) 于 (Thu Aug 2 23:16:02 2012, 美东) 提到:
那个 “Echt Warsteiner ” 说得也很好！
不知道是否是说英语母语的。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
kominu (岑夫子) 于 (Thu Aug 2 23:33:53 2012, 美东) 提到:
联名集体抗议吧，
要是涉案编辑，作者如果还能保住饭碗，
那只能证明Nature也不过就是搞种族主义的工具而已。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
goldenratio (脚丫) 于 (Thu Aug 2 23:44:24 2012, 美东) 提到:
赞有理有利有节
不过主编们好像都度假去了，估计中国网民的抗议信炸掉邮箱了
猜测一下以后他们会怎样应付？
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
dwang3 (dw) 于 (Thu Aug 2 23:45:42 2012, 美东) 提到:
楼主写的很好，赞！我也已给主编发信，要求辞退文章作者并道歉。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
mediterranea (地中海) 于 (Thu Aug 2 23:50:39 2012, 美东) 提到:
给editor发信了，cc给原作者
俺英文水平一般，献丑了
Dear Nature Editors,
I am writing to you to bring to your attention that it is very disturbing to
see a biased, non-scientific and hostile article (link attached below) on
Nature, such a top scientific Journal that many researchers and scientists
including me rely on for knowledge and truth. http://www.nature.com/news/why-great-olympic-feats-raise-suspicions-1.11109
First of all, the examples the author used have been proved to be wrong by
public media; I see no reason those examples can appear in a scientific
article if they went through the scrutiny of the author.
Second, the data used in the article is selective and biased. They author (
intentionally or not), cherry pick the swimming time data for his comparison
and ignore significantly relevant data to create the implication that the
Olympic swimmer did something “unblieveable”, if not to draw the
conclusion she used doping.
Even not to mention these non-scientific reasoning of this article, the
suggestive way of its writing implicating racial profiling has caused its
readers to feel very unrespected and disturbed.
I highly regret to see such an inappropriate article published on this
scientific journal with reputation and strongly urge Nature editors to take
measure to save the damage cased to Nature’s reputation by this article.
Sincerely,
XXX
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
ultidream (Newer) 于 (Thu Aug 2 23:52:02 2012, 美东) 提到:
写得不错
to
scientists
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
zaizaiya (zaizai) 于 (Thu Aug 2 23:52:14 2012, 美东) 提到:
ding
to
scientists
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Acartia (深水鱼) 于 (Thu Aug 2 23:52:45 2012, 美东) 提到:
都是脊梁人物，顶
to
scientists
comparison
take
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
DarkMatterER (小黑大妈) 于 (Fri Aug 3 00:06:34 2012, 美东) 提到:
今天跟老公电话汇报了这件事并发了链接，我lg百忙之中写了这个，请问各位大侠，他
应该发到哪里？
他让我修改，我英语不行。。。
Philip Campbell, Ph.D. and Editor-in-Chief of Nature,
As usual, I was surfing the Nature website in a hope to find some exciting
scientific reports. However, I was extremely disappointed and frustrated to
read this news on Nature website. http://www.nature.com/news/why-great-olympic-feats-raise-suspicions-1.11109. The feeling of reading such a report on Nature is like hearing a HUGE EXPLOSION during a melodious symphony!
I think Nature made its name because it reported results and news based on
facts that have been vigorously tested and that has happened! Unfortunately,
neither my colleagues nor I can smell any sense of rationale of the above
report based on a fact! The fact that Ye has passed the drug test was
totally ignored. Publishing such a reckless and groundless report in one of
the most prestigious SCIENTIFIC journal Nature seems me is against the rules
that Nature has been set for so many years!
I sincerely hope that Nature can either remove this report or apologize to
Ye. She is really a great women athlete in our time and showed us the great
moment in woman swimming history! I sincerely hope Nature can keep its track
on reporting unbiased and well-evidenced news!
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
nmtycl (你们太有才了) 于 (Fri Aug 3 00:50:55 2012, 美东) 提到:
nature撞在枪口上了，大快人心！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
A95627 (95627) 于 (Fri Aug 3 00:57:19 2012, 美东) 提到:
DING
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
MMT007 (踏雪寻梅) 于 (Fri Aug 3 01:17:37 2012, 美东) 提到:
支持!
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
ffviii (当当当) 于 (Fri Aug 3 05:11:18 2012, 美东) 提到:
贴个我写给Nature的信
Dear Editor-in-Chief,
It is a disappointment for me to read the article “Why great Olympic feats
raise suspicions: 'Performance profiling' could help to dispel doubts.”
This article was composed in the name of “science” by Mr. Ewen Callaway, a
Nature editor. Unfortunately it only demonstrated Mr. Callaway’s lack of
statistical knowledge, scientific mindset, and qualification as an editor in
a prestige scientific magazine.
Mr. Callaway made a blunt accusation of possible doping by the record-
breaking Olympian athlete Shiwen Ye, after the International Olympic
Committee declared her clean. This is a serious accusation of ethic
violation based on speculations and “mis-quoted” data from Mr. Callaway.
He challenged her ethicalness just because she made a major breakthrough. By
this logic, should Nature, a top level journal, challenge every contributor
for possible violation of ethicalness? Or would Nature rather repeat a
publication after the similar result is published somewhere else?
Mr. Callaway even failed to quote the correct improvement of Ms. Ye’s
personal time in his article, as pointed out by the commentators Mr. Lai
Jiang. His comment was deleted from the Nature.com website, but recited by
other commentators.
This article is a disgrace to Nature, and Mr. Callaway lacks the
qualification as a Nature editor or as a scientific researcher. I urge
Nature to remove Mr. Callaway from editorial duty to prevent further
degradation of Nature towards an entertainment magazine. Nature should also
apologize to Ms. Ye for this false accusation.
A link to the aforementioned article is included for your reference:
http://www.nature.com/news/why-great-olympic-feats-raise-suspic
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
ethzurich (ETH) 于 (Fri Aug 3 05:39:10 2012, 美东) 提到:
Lai Jiang写的太好了，投稿过去吧。。。。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
iplai (iplai) 于 (Fri Aug 3 05:42:49 2012, 美东) 提到:
支持叶诗文！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
jimmykk22 (Jimmy) 于 (Fri Aug 3 07:08:00 2012, 美东) 提到:
Nature 主编回信了，还是一样的腔调：
Dear Dr XXX,
We are sorry that our news article has offended so many readers. We stand by
the piece and reject suggestions that it was motivated by bias; our
intention was to investigate the science behind a controversy arising from
the current Olympic Games. The first paragraph emphasizes that Ye has never
had a positive drug test and notes that much of the discussion of her win "
has been tinged with racial and political undertones". The last paragraph
quotes an expert saying "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."
The article is a fair-minded look at a controversy that we did not initiate.
It asks whether new developments in performance monitoring could dispel the
unfortunate suspicions that, these days, the most extraordinary athletic
performance raise, whatever the nationality of the athlete.
Best,
Roseann Campbell
nature
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
zaosen (leng) 于 (Fri Aug 3 07:14:51 2012, 美东) 提到:
昨天的时候作者的原 title是
Why great Olympic feats raise suspicions
'Performance profiling' could help to catch cheaters in sport.
注意cheaters...后来他心虚，改成现在的title了。。。
feats
a
in
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Qiutian (秋天) 于 (Fri Aug 3 08:14:15 2012, 美东) 提到:
作为一个科学刊物，有错误是应该改的。他们修改了标题，变得不那么aggressive了，
但文中的错误还没改，引用的数据很片面，导致了错误的论点，这些也需要改掉；
nature经常要求有多个例子，所以只提叶是不行的，应该把什么飞鱼、adlington、还
有Noah所说的那个骑车的都放进去
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
zhongdao (imrn) 于 (Fri Aug 3 08:28:05 2012, 美东) 提到:
去它妈逼的什么nature 全中国应该罢订这杂志
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Gilda (屠龙公主,好女不跟女斗) 于 (Fri Aug 3 10:02:24 2012, 美东) 提到:
这个是德语名字。 Echt好像是eight, Warsteiner好像是一种酒
所以我们要明确指出，某些编辑不要yy都是中国人烦这篇文章。很多老外的科学家也受
不了了。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Qiutian (秋天) 于 (Fri Aug 3 10:09:49 2012, 美东) 提到:
光中国人烦就可以无视吗？我相信Nature不会希望看到中国人都有这样的想法
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Gilda (屠龙公主,好女不跟女斗) 于 (Fri Aug 3 10:37:51 2012, 美东) 提到:
那当然不是这个意思。。。。 光中国人烦，一定会被他们无耻的认为是我们
oversensitive
加上这些，能有力抽他们耳光，不要ｙｙ是别人错误了。
他们能自省是自己错误吗？
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
shuihaizi (水孩子) 于 (Fri Aug 3 10:45:49 2012, 美东) 提到:
这种意识要不得，只有中国人不爽更是问题，更是赤裸裸的歧视
没见过有人敢说老黑oversensitive的
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
aprilmom (April Mom) 于 (Fri Aug 3 13:49:38 2012, 美东) 提到:
据说subtitle改过几次了。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
moxi (马甲甲) 于 (Fri Aug 3 13:51:37 2012, 美东) 提到:
这很正常吧。
我以前给nyt发抗议邮件，后来文章题目也变了，段落也删了……
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
aprilmom (April Mom) 于 (Fri Aug 3 14:31:08 2012, 美东) 提到:
Nature News网页今天有改动：
http://www.nature.com/news/why-great-olympic-feats-raise-suspic
Corrected: 03 August 2012
修正了小叶MM对比成绩的时间，加了editor's note，
但是不承认文中观点的偏见和结论的误导，更没有道歉的意思。
宣称不再接收comments，并且承认了选择性的删帖。
BTW，现在的网页存档有303个comments，而不是我们曾经认为
的300个评论的上限。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
submarine0 (水不在深) 于 (Fri Aug 3 15:09:03 2012, 美东) 提到:
Boycott Nature!!!
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
submarine0 (水不在深) 于 (Fri Aug 3 15:09:58 2012, 美东) 提到:
boycott Nature!!!
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
TheSun (纯阳) 于 (Fri Aug 3 15:11:50 2012, 美东) 提到:
Katie Ledecky
american swimmer and gold medal winner
800m 8:19.78 Jun 12
800m 8:14.63 August 3, 2012
5.15 seconds improvement within 2 month
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
rainlion (rainlion) 于 (Sat Aug 4 01:53:53 2012, 美东) 提到:
这个谁给捅去国内媒体啊。。。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
rainlion (rainlion) 于 (Sat Aug 4 02:29:34 2012, 美东) 提到:
我靠 他怎么搞的像刚吸过毒一样啊。。。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
bys (bys) 于 (Sat Aug 4 03:30:03 2012, 美东) 提到:
英国人是婊子养的。这个世界上最现实最利益至上的民族大概就是英国人，连他们的殖
民地美国都要富有理想色彩得多。
最近一系列的国家和个人经历，我都想起来鸦片战争。
幸运的是，鸦片战争是鬼子打上门来，这次是中国打上门去。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
majajama2010 (maja) 于 (Sat Aug 4 04:46:40 2012, 美东) 提到:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/olympics/katie-ledecky-15-
Said Donna de Varona, the 1964 Olympic champion who watched from the stands:
“It’s the innocence of youth . . . [and] the ambition of
youth.”
The time was more than five seconds faster than Ledecky swam at the U.S.
Olympic trials in July and about 20 seconds faster than a year ago.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/olympics/katie-ledecky-15-
In a sport where competitors spend years trying to shave fractions of
seconds off their personal best (PB) times, Ledecky has been hacking off
large chunks, more than 11 seconds this month.
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Fengxian (静) 于 (Tue Aug 7 10:45:49 2012, 美东) 提到:
热赞楼主jianglai大英雄，自然上的回帖太好了！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
lincontact (番茄素) 于 (Tue Aug 7 22:21:05 2012, 美东) 提到:
jianglai 你写的真太好了！ 佩服！！！
大家以后在网上灌水应该以jianglai 为标准，只有这样有理有据的回复才能真正发挥
影响力！ |
|
