First, it is always the most important to publish papers quickly by thinking. You can publish papers as long as you have ideas, and you don't have to do experiments, including SCI papers. For example, 20 10, our research group published three SCI papers only by this means. The first is that hydrogen can treat carbon monoxide poisoning. This paper was published on the premise that we obtained experimental evidence, which is a bit opportunistic. The second article is based on my application for the National Natural Science Foundation last year (unsuccessful). It has been suggested that oral mannitol can play an antioxidant role by inducing bacteria in the large intestine to produce hydrogen. We have no comprehensive and direct experimental evidence for this view, but we have proved that oral mannitol can induce bacteria in large intestine to produce hydrogen in human body. As for whether it can have antioxidant effect, because of financial support, we have not carried it out in depth; The third paper is because a student found that this effect was proved by someone during the research of lactulose in the treatment of colitis, but it was not understood from the perspective of inducing hydrogen, so we published the paper according to the viewpoint.

In 2009, according to the viewpoint of Japanese scholars, we developed our own treatment method of hydrogen delivery through physiological saline. At that time, many teachers and friends told me not to tell others, but I think this may be ok for a relatively strong laboratory, but it may have a negative impact on our relatively ordinary research group, because even if I don't tell others, others can still solve this technical obstacle by themselves through the paper. By that time, everyone can do it. I think blocking a relatively simple technology in front of national scholars is like throwing an egg at a stone. On the contrary, if I tell others and offer them some fair cooperation conditions, although not everyone will cooperate happily, I believe most people will treat each other sincerely. Later, it turned out that my point of view was correct. In this way, we have reached 50 cooperative units, and the number of papers published through cooperation reached 15 last year. There will be more in the future, which not only won the respect of domestic counterparts, but also helped us improve our international status. Therefore, we have become the group that has published the most papers in the field of hydrogen research, and our international colleagues have also recognized our contribution in this field. If we don't take the road of extensive cooperation at first, our most optimistic estimate now is to publish 10 relatively general research papers, which is almost impossible to form a collective advantage.

Third, rely on unique technology to publish papers quickly. We have no practical experience, but it is certainly possible. If some laboratories have unique technology, they can provide paid or unpaid technical services through extensive cooperation, and they can also publish many cooperative papers. I remember that many teachers in the unit where I studied in China 20 years ago and the laboratory where I studied abroad 65,438+00 years ago (they provided animal nuclear magnetic resonance and MRS) relied on this.

I remember when I was studying, there were few ridiculous tricks like * * * first * * correspondent, but I even recognized the previous name at that time, which was actually a relatively pure way of cooperative publishing. Now many of our papers have many * * * as the first * * * as the correspondent, which is actually very bad. The essence is to be coerced by the unit to compete for external academic interests, which is a vulgar academic commercialization.