某老外同志发在Nature上的评论

来源: 于 2012-08-04 06:54:30 [博客] [旧帖] [给我悄悄话] 本文已被阅读：次

  • Report this comment | #48362

    Venti Awake said:

    To Audrey Richard:

    Welcome to the PhD family!

    I am afraid I had a totally different feeling, as a matter of fact, very uncomfortable feeling, when I started reading the piece. If it is indeed about going against anti-doping controls, a target with proven doping history would be appropriate, and there is a long list of candidates at his disposal (Even so, I am not sure if he could get away from serious legal troubles). Can you imagine a news article about terrorism placing your picture aside the story after you being proved innocent? If so, congratulations, you have a winning case!

    I am not a fan of his "explanation" part either. A person with a biomedical background should have known better about "anomalous". It happens whether we like it or not.

    Mother nature has her brutal side:

    1. A Chicago girl Tinley was born with Apert syndrome, a rare genetic disorder that occurs in about 1 in 10,000 births.
    2. PKU occurs in about 1 in 10,000 births (Steinfeld et al., 2004).
    3. OCA2 in the United States occurs as approximately 1:36,000 (Lee et al, 1994)
    ...
    The list goes on (http://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/rare-genetic-disorders-learning-about-genetic-disease-979).

    Are those anomalous cases? I think more so than Ye's case, statistically. Should we question their legitimacy? If the answer is no, why is it so hard for us to embrace the excitement Mother nature brought to us at the Olympic games when she shows her gentle side? If it still seems okay with you to dismiss the likelihood of Ye's "anomalous" performance at the Olympics (which has been proven not anomalous at all), let's add Rebecca Soni's picture to this article, side by side. After all, both of them are clean. Aren't they? Or by the author's standard, they are just dopers who have not being caught yet, not until some miraculous "performance profiling" is adopted.

    As to the difference between Nature News and Nature Magazine, I agree with you. I do not expect the same level of qualities. However, I do not expect cheap insinuations which one often finds in paparazzi magazines. If I want a dose of something like that, Nature News is the last place I would think of.

    As to Noah Gray, I have to add this. As professionals, we just do not behave like kindergarteners. He's not the editor of the News front, I get it. But he is related; otherwise he would not have the authority or means to check the count issue in the comment section. But I expect more out of him as a scientist, or maybe I am deadly wrong. In science, when it comes to right or wrong regardless of the subject, we debate, we do not mock however naive the other side appears. That's the bottomline. Respect your opponent, my friend. That's my take on the spirit of the Olympics.

    This is the last time I visit Nature. Not that I have turned into a Nature hater, but my time will be better spent at other places where I can find real science instead of hyped fabrications. It was very nice exchanging ideas with you. Please keep up with your good posts. I am sorry I probably won't be able to read them. But I'm sure many people would appreciate your input just as I do. Good day!

  •