fdff
不得了！方舟子事件上自然雜誌了
北京發生的鬧劇：對中國研究人員受到人身攻擊的批評
David Cyranoski
譯自自然雜誌： 29 September 2010 | Nature 467, 511 (2010) |
在中國科學可以是一個粗糙的遊戲。8月29日北京，方舟子在他從茶館在回家的路上被毆打：他被兩名男子追趕，抓住，用錘子擊打 。方舟子曾是生物化學家 – 他在過去十多年裏創立運行了一個網站，以揭露科學騙子。
“我相信他們計劃殺死我，” 方舟子說。 “唯一讓我閉嘴的方法就是殺我。”他逃脫了，隻有輕微的割傷和瘀傷。今年六月，方玄昌，一個曾經報導中國科學腐敗的新聞記者，也曾被兩名男子用鋼棒毆打，嚴重致傷。
9月21日，警察逮捕犯罪嫌疑犯主謀武漢同濟醫學院泌尿科醫生肖傳國。盡管肖不能被采訪發表評述，但他對北京警察已承認參與毆打方的事件。 方舟子說，肖可能麵臨3-10年的監禁 ，如果謀殺未遂指控成立的話，期限將更長。
肖傳國和方舟子從未見麵或交談過，但他們在互聯網上相撞，在法庭上相遇。肖與方舟子和方玄昌的衝突起因於肖傳國發明的一種外科手術，其目的是恢複脊柱裂或脊髓損傷患者膀胱和腸道功能。肖傳國報導其手術包括改道體神經取得了令人關注的87％的成功率【1，2】。 2005年，他被提名候選人，參與競爭中國科學界的精英機構中國科學院院士。
肖傳國被提名後，人們開始在方舟子的網站（http://fangzhouzi-xys.blogspot.com）發表對肖的結論的質疑。 其後在2005年9月，方舟子在北京科技報上發表一篇文章說肖傳國不是象他在自己的簡曆中所聲稱的紐約大學副教授，而隻有一個助理教授。文章進一步指出肖列出的26篇英文論文中隻有四篇是期刊，其餘的為會議摘要。
目前還不知道是否方舟子的文章影響了科學院的決定，但肖沒有當選。 肖先後五次以誹謗罪起訴方舟子。方舟子輸一次，贏兩次，還有兩案待定。 有人批評方舟子的網站為舉報人提供了一個平台，舉報人
可以對敵對方進行不公正的攻擊。同時，外界對“肖氏反射弧”外科手術批評不斷。去年，方玄昌發表了係列文章質疑“肖氏反射弧”的有效性，這也可能導致其受到人身攻擊。
北京律師彭健（Peng Jian）說，他已經會見了20-30曾經由肖做過手術而產生副作用的患者，他們正在需求賠償。今年夏天，美國第一份治療試驗在泌尿學期刊上報導了模棱兩可的結果，期刊雜誌的兩個編委說，要考慮experimental4。
與此同時，方舟子沒有再受到攻擊。他說： “這不會阻止我”。 “我將繼續做我現在做的”。
參考文獻：略。
http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100929/full/467511a.html
Published online 29 September 2010 | Nature 467, 511 (2010) |
Brawl in Beijing
Critics of Chinese researchers targeted in physical attacks
David Cyranoski
Science can be a rough game in China. On 29 August, on his way home from a tea house in Beijing, Fang Shimin was assaulted. The former biochemist — who for the past decade has run a website exposing scientific fraudsters — was chased by two men, caught and attacked with a hammer.
"I believe they planned to kill me," he says. "The only way to shut me up is to kill me." He escaped with only minor cuts and bruises. In June, Fang Xuanchang, a journalist who had reported on corruption in science in China, was left with more serious injuries after two men assaulted him with steel rods.
On 21 September, police arrested Xiao Chuanguo, a urologist at Tongji Medical College in Wuhan, on suspicion of master¬minding both plots. Xiao could not be reached for comment, but has confessed his involvement to Beijing's police. Fang Shimin says Xiao could face 3–10 years in prison — or more if the charges become attempted murder.
Xiao and Fang Shimin have never met or spoken, but their paths have crossed on the Internet — and in court. Xiao's clash with him, and with Fang Xuanchang, revolves around a surgical procedure devised by Xiao that aims to restore bladder and bowel function in patients with spina bifida or spinal-cord injuries. Xiao reported an impressive 87% success rate for the operation, which involves re-routing nerves1,2. In 2005, he was nominated for membership of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, the elite body of the Chinese scientific world.
Following his nomination, people started posting questions about Xiao's claims on Fang Shimin's website (http://fangzhouzi-xys.blogspot.com). Then in September 2005, Fang Shimin published an essay in Beijing Sci–Tech Report, which said that Xiao was not an associate professor at New York University as he states in his CV, but only an assistant professor. Furthermore, the article said that only 4 of the 26 English-language publications Xiao listed were journal articles — the rest being abstracts from conference proceedings.
It is not known if Fang Shimin's article affected the academy's decision, but Xiao was not made a member and has since sued Fang Shimin for libel five times. Fang Shimin, whose site has been criticized for giving contributors a platform for unjustified attacks on their enemies3, lost one case and won two, with the other two undecided. Meanwhile, criticism of the 'Xiao procedure' has continued. Last year, Fang Xuanchang published a series of articles questioning its efficacy, which may have prompted the attacks on him.
Beijing-based lawyer Peng Jian says he has interviewed 20–30 patients who have experienced side effects after undergoing the Xiao procedure, and who are seeking compensation. This summer, the first US trial of the treatment reported ambiguous results in The Journal of Urology4, and two journal editorials said it should be considered experimental4.
Fang Shimin, meanwhile, is unfazed by the attack. "It won't stop me," he says. "I will continue to do what I am doing."
References
1. Xiao, C.-G. Proc. Int. Conf. Urol. Shanghai, 2–4 July (2005).
2. Xiao, C.-G. Eur. Urol. 49, 22-29 (2006).
3. Cyranoski, D. Nature 441, 392-393 (2006).
4. Peters, K. M. et al. J. Urol. 184, 702-708 (2010).
