方舟子的Blog

（2007年7月27日答丹麦《周末报》(Weekendavisen)记者电子邮件采访。原文为英文。下面是译文和原文）

问：在你帮助揭露的科研造假中，你认为哪一起是最重要的？为什么？

答：自2000年以来我们已揭露了大约700起科研造假，很难从中挑出一个最重要的。“核酸营养”骗局可能算得上。它是我们揭露的事例中第一起获得了媒体广泛的报道（包括国内和国际媒体。著名的美国《科学》为此发了一篇专门报道）。它涉及了十几名中国生化学家，他们举行“学术会议”和“听证会”为该骗局辩护。6年之后，这场战役还未结束。珍奥公司还在中央电视台做其“核酸营养品”的广告。

问：科研造假问题在中国是否比其他国家严重？为什么？形势是否在好转？如果是的话，为什么？如果不是，为什么？

答：在当今中国科研造假问题是如此泛滥，已成为一个独特的现象，我宁愿称之为“学术腐败”。它要比其他国家或中国任何其他时期都严重。它是以下几个因素相互作用的结果：专制主义（缺少言论自由、新闻自由和学术自由）、极端资本主义（试图让所有东西都商业化，包括科研和教育）和传统文化（缺少科学精神，爱面子的文化，等等）。形势有所好转。人们已注意到这是一个严重的问题。与6年前相比，中国媒体更愿意报道学术不端事件、呼吁改革和批评政府，并有更多的自由——虽然还很有限——这么做。而中国政府至少承认这是一个严重的问题，并已发布了几项规章（但是我们还在等着它采取真正的行动）。

问：如果伪科学被当真的话，对中国、中国人民和中国经济会有什么后果？有没有例子表明人们因为坏科学而丧生？

答：它已浪费了大量的公共资金。例如，在大约10年前，一个“水变油”骗局获得了许多政府官员的支持，并得到数亿元人民币的资助。最近，有报道说一个被我们首先揭露过的“永动机”获得了地方政府的支持，为它申请3千万元人民币的资助。如果伪科学被商业化，它将浪费消费者的金钱，而如果是做为药品和保健品销售的话，则也会危害消费者的健康。

问：你是如何获得涉嫌科研造假的事件的信息的？你是如何核实指控是否正确的？

答：这些信息通常是读者用电子邮件寄来的。1）我通常不接受匿名投稿。作者应该让我知道他或他的真实姓名和身份，虽然没有其允许我不会泄露出去。2）指控必须听上去合理，并有证据支持。在发表之前我通常会做一些调查。大多数指控是关于剽窃和伪造履历的，这很容易用网上搜索进行调查。在发表指控之前我有时会征询专家的意见。3）我总是欢迎并发表被指控者及其支持者的反驳。如果某项指控被发现是没有根据的，我会迅速做出澄清和道歉。这已发生过几次。至今为止没有证据表明有哪位无辜者的声誉被我们损害了。

问：科学界对你的活动有什么样的普遍态度？中国科学家是否欢迎你的活动？总的来说，你遇到的最大障碍是什么？

答：我想科学界对我的活动有着一种复杂的感情。我相信许多中国科学会愿意生活在一个更好、更干净的学术环境中，但是造假在中国学术界是如此泛滥，大多数学者对此已经习惯，而且许多人自己并不干净。他们通常会欢迎我的活动，直到他们自身的利益受到了威胁。虽然我们已揭露了大约700起，只有一小部分（大约2％）受到官方的处理。有一些研究生承担了责任并被开除。但是教授极少受到惩罚。官方只是简单地无视我们的指控，甚至试图去掩盖。我想这是最大的障碍。

问：以前你曾经写过关于北京华大基因研究中心的文章。据报道，该研究中心对基因研究采取一种“民族主义”的方式，要人们警惕不要让国外分享中国的DNA。中国科学界是否有许多人也持同样的观点？为什么？这样做的后果会是什么？

答：是的，我想这与民族主义有关，它在中国科学界也是很流行的。许多造假是打着爱国的招牌进行的。中国没有足够的资源来研究她的基因多样性，因此国际合作是有必要的。民族主义能够成为科学进步的一大障碍。（孤立的小群体是遗传学研究的很好目标，这样的研究应该尽快去做，因为这种群体正在消失）

1) What would you consider the most important case of scientific fraud that you have helped unveil? Why was it important?

Since 2000 we have exposed about 700 cases of scientific fraud, and it will be difficult to single out the most important one. “Nucleic acid nutrition” scheme is probably the one. It was the first case that brought wide media coverage (both domestically and internationally. The prestigious Science magazine ran a special report about it). It involved more than a dozen of Chinese biochemists, who held “conference” and “hearing” to defend the scheme. After 6 years, the battle hasn’t finished. Zhen-Ao Company is still advertising its “nucleic acid nutrition” products on CCTV.

2) Is scientific fraud a larger problem in China than elsewhere? Why? Is the situation improving? If so, why? If not, why not?

The problem of scientific fraud in contemporary China is so widely spread that it’s a unique phenomenon, which I prefer to call it “academic corruption”. It’s larger than elsewhere or any other periods of China. It’s the result of interactions between totalitarianism (the lack of freedoms of speech, press and academic research), extreme capitalism (try to commercialize everything, including science and education) and traditional culture (the lack of scientific spirit, the culture of saving-face, etc). The situation is somehow improving. There is awareness that this is a serious problem. Compared to 6 years ago, Chinese media are more willing to report the misconduct cases, appeal for a reform and criticize government, and have more freedom, although still very limited, to do so. And Chinese government at least admits this is a serious problems and has issued several regulations (but we are still waiting to see it take real action).

3) What are the potential consequences for China, its people and its economy, of pseudo-science being taken at face value? Are there examples of people who have lost their lives because of bad science?

It has wasted a lot of public funds. For instance, about 10 years ago, a “turning water into oil” scheme gained supports from many government officials and received several hundreds of millions of RMB funding. Recently, it’s reported that a “perpetual motion machine”, which we first exposed, is supported by local government to apply for 30 millions of RMB funding. When the pseudo-science is commercialized, it’s a waste of consumers’ money, and can also damage consumers’ health if it’s sold as drug or dietary supplement.

4) How do you get information about suspected cases of scientific fraud? How do you check if the allegations are correct?

The information usually is sent by email from our readers. 1) I usually don’t accept anonymous submissions. The authors should let me know his or her real name and identity, although I won’t leak it without his or her permission. 2) The allegation must sound reasonable, and has supporting evidence. I usually do some investigations before publishing the allegations. Most of allegations are about plagiarism and faked resume, which are easily investigated by online search. Sometimes I asked experts’ opinions before publishing allegations. 3) I always welcome and publish the rebuttals from the accused and his or her supporters. If an allegation turns out to be unfounded, I will promptly clarify and apologize for it. This has happened several times. So far there is no evidence that the reputation of an innocent person has been damaged by us.

5) What is the general attitude towards your activities in the scientific community? Do Chinese scientists welcome your activities? What has, overall, been the biggest obstacle you have encountered?

I think the scientific community has a mixed feeling regarding my activities. I believe many Chinese scientists would like to live in a better and cleaner academic environment, but the fraud is so widely spread among Chinese academics that most of them have been used to it and many of them don’t have clean hands. They usually welcome my activities until their own interests are in danger. Although we have exposed about 700 cases, only a small portion (about 2%) has been dealt with by authorities. Some graduate students later took the responsibility and were expelled. But the professors were rarely punished. The authorities just simply ignore our accusations or even try to cover it up. I think this is the biggest obstacle.

6) Previously, you wrote about a Beijing laboratory called the Huada Gene Research Center. According to reports, the laborary adopted a “nationalistic” approach to gene research, warning against sharing China’s DNA with the outside world. Is this a view held by many in the Chinese scientific community? Why? What are the consequences of this?

Yes, I think this has something to do with nationalism, which is also very popular in the Chinese scientific community. Many frauds are committed under the veil of patriotism. China doesn’t have enough resource to study her gene diversity and it’s essential to have international collaborations. Nationalism can become a big obstacle of scientific development. (Small isolated populations are good targets of genetic research, and the study should be done as soon as possible because this kind of populations is disappearing)