博客

热度 1已有 187 次阅读2016-2-27 02:52 |个人分类:科坛奇事|系统分类:学术打假| 自然

刘实超一流真科火眼金睛，《自然》顶奸猾伪科撤稿不断

刘实超一流真科火眼金睛，《自然》顶奸猾伪科撤稿不断

http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_502041670102ww1u.html

《撤稿观察》今日发表一篇题为“STAP stem cell researcher Obokata loses another paper”（酸澡细胞研究者小保方舟子又失一篇论文）的文章，刘实及时发表了第一篇评论如下：

Shi V. Liu February 26, 2016 at 11:26 am

This is not any surprise to me. In fact I specifically pointed out a potential problem for this particular paper in my letter to Nature on March 20, 2014 in which I wrote: “Reading Obokata’s earlier publications it seems she had a tendency to over-emphasize her “success” and over-look her failure. For example, she have described her “success” of cultivating and transplanting cell sheets even though these cell sheets were rejected at the end. If I were Obokata I would not publish several “successful” cultivation papers on fabricating cell sheets if I knew the transplantations of these cell sheets all ended with complete degeneration.”
In addition to this I also pointed out: “Another thing that struck me is a total lack of correct understanding to some scientific methodologies she have used. For example, in a paper published in Applied and Environmental Microbiology (75:3826-33, 2009), it was repeated in many places that inoculations were made to give 0.1 to 0.5 cell per chamber, or 0.1 to 0.3 cell per chamber. Using the exact words as shown in the paper (p3832 left column), “The microbial cells were inoculated with 0.1 to 0.5 cell per chamber in this experiment”. I had done many years of microbiological research. I knew I could not grow a microbial culture from 0.1 to 0.5 cell per chamber because I simply could not inoculate a fraction of a cell.”
Thus, I told Nature:” Apparently, Obokata has not been strictly trained and lacks a comprehensive knowledge. Thus, it is not surprise she could make some “amazing” discovery. But the problem with the publication of the STAP papers is that the papers should have been strictly peer-reviewed and rigorously edited.”
In that letter entitled as “Getting out of the STAP’s trap: an open letter to Nature”, I urged Nature: “It is a high time for Nature to seriously think the risk of continuing a strong belief in cell DIVISION-based biology and the reward of embracing a solid discovery on cell REPRODUCTION life science. No cell can be DIVIDED to live and even “self-renew”. All cells can REPRODUCE and become older. This fundamental difference in the basic understanding of cell life may explain why CNS have kept publishing many flawed and even fraud papers while Logical Biology has no need to retract any of its publications.”
The full text of my letter to Nature can be obtained for verification by emailing me at[email protected]

刘实指出这个撤稿并不惊奇，因为早在2014年3月20日刘实给《自然》的信中就特别指出这篇论文的问题。该信还指出小保方舟子其它论文的问题。并敦促《自然》不要再延续“细胞分裂”的伪科而鼓吹所谓的细胞自新。

相关老博文

漏洞百出的酸澡细胞论文在《自然》还能活多久？

美女青科“失足”，《自然》负有重责

《自然》扯淡：抗拒高人批评，必走矮人邪路

“酸澡细胞”泡掉美女科学成名梦，《自然》卖淫被逼撤稿还称雄

预期：《自然》明天应撤稿，而且一次撤三篇

真假分不清，《自然》还有脸称自己是顶尖杂志？！

自然现象：“妓女”常被抓，“妓院”长开门

哈哈！相信《自然》能严谨还不如相信妓院有贞操

不可低估《自然》淫想，酸澡细胞撤稿后还会被继续引用

没有《科学》支持冒然带美女登顶《自然》是有生命危险的