First of all, Cao Xuetao is not Pang Qingnian. He is an academician of China, the United States, Britain and the French Academy of Sciences. I believe everyone except the mentally retarded will understand his position and reputation in Chinese and foreign medical circles. Followed by academicians of the National Academy of Sciences of China, the United States, Germany, Britain and France, as well as a jury composed of editors of Nature and Science magazines at the top of the technology pyramid. Not just very good.
Ms Elizabeth Bik, a doctor in the field of microbiology and immunology in the United States, asked Cao Xuetao a question. She worked as an assistant researcher at Stanford in her early years, which is our teaching assistant level. According to her own introduction, she later resigned from Stanford, specializing in forging improper image reproduction in the medical field.
In particular, she talked about the relationship between countries and data fraud: China and India have a high proportion of problematic papers, while France, Germany, Japan and the United States are relatively low. I can't help it. The data is so, but on the other hand, the expert evaluation of western developed countries with China researchers wearing congenital colored glasses also shows how difficult it is for Cao Xuetao to earn the status of a foreign academician. Looking back at the entire domestic scientific and technological community, there are few such elites.
What happened: 165438+ 10/0/3. Cao Xuetao attended the national report meeting on the construction of scientific and technological ethics and style of study held in the Great Hall of the People, and made a speech as one of the three conference spokespersons. 165438+1October 14, Ms. Elizabeth spoke on Twitter, saying that there was something wrong with the picture of a China Daniel's paper. She said, "I'm reading a paper by a famous professor, academician and president of China, but look at this picture ..." On the same day, Fang made a speech on her Twitter, pointing out that this person is the president of Nankai University.
The time node and details of this event are very intriguing. In fact, as a professional counterfeiter, Dr. Elizabeth Bick has discovered some mistakes made by Cao Xuetao's team (according to her own statement) many years ago, and has done a lot of meticulous work and read a lot of papers written by Cao Xuetao's team. This time, she questioned more than 40 articles written by Cao Xuetao's team on the paper review website PubPeer, covering the period from 2003 to 20 19, including sub-medical fields that she was not familiar with. I believe that as the only counterfeiter, she must have spent a lot of energy and money on these jobs. Wan Li, an international friend not far away, turned his attention to China and selflessly chose to help Academician Cao Xuetao in his medical career. What spirit is this? As Cao Xuetao, shouldn't you be grateful? Therefore, Cao Xuetao immediately responded after reading her article: I have given this matter the highest priority ... I will make use of this precious learning opportunity to do better not only in promoting science, but also in maintaining the accuracy and integrity of science. The two sides had many good interactions in a friendly atmosphere, but it is a pity that Cao Xuetao's reply was immediately quoted by some netizens as evidence of Cao Xuetao's fraud, which is another story. Some people say that people are for profit. Now that Dr. Elizabeth mentioned it, no matter who the other party is, you should respond. My question is: since the problem has long been discovered, why not choose to publish it? If nothing else, Cao Xuetao, as a foreign academician in many western developed countries, can refute his foreign academician with a real hammer, which should be helpful to improve the reputation of this doctor. Or, as a transaction, what benefits might she get? Alas, I am a layman and can't get rid of these secular ideas. I should fight! But over the years, this woman has never asked her own questions to the medical profession or the Cao Xuetao team. She persisted for several years until the date of 1 19, and finally pointed out these mistakes without naming them. Coincidentally, this article was discovered by Mr. Fang, who was worried about the situation in Hong Kong that day. With his profound social knowledge, he immediately judged that he was to take the blame. It's amazing to be here by chance. What surprised me even more was that we discerning people immediately found the articles of Mr. Fang and Ms. Elizabeth, and the next day launched a report on the Internet 15, exposing the biggest counterfeiter in the medical field. The vast number of netizens have left messages on the Internet saying: Young scholars were just encouraged to be patriotic, honest and upright researchers at the national lecture on style of study and moral construction, and they were slapped the next day. Cao Tong, let's hurry!
I can only sigh: Chaoyang people are really not built, they should shoot when they should, and I can have everything.
After reading the whole story of this incident, I feel that there is a link that is so closely connected. Who can answer the question? Thank you!