我国科学家开发出比Cas9/sgRNA更优的基因编辑系统

MP4

就像方，还想人肉证人，不是一般的卑鄙

MP4

smilingcloud 发表于 2016-9-7 10:44
MP4　　

我跟你的智识水平差太多。　　

嗯
造谣的你就不停发

MP4

2003年博士毕业以后，沈啸在美国Emory大学从事博士后研究，2008年开始担任美国Cedars-Sinai Medical Center的研究员科学家，2013年被聘为助理教授，2015年入选浙江大学“百人计划”。

这就是所谓土鳖没见过世面！

smilingcloud

没有受过科研训练的人，也不清楚科研道德与伦理。


韩如果在国外的话，可以被写入科研道德教育的事例了。

即便不是存在FFP（Fabrication, Falsification, Plagiarism），
韩的目前的种种表现也都属于QRP（Questionable Research Practice ）

1，Failing to retain significant research data for a reasonable period
2，Maintaining inadequate research records, especially for results that are published or are relied on by others
3，Using inappropriate statistical or other methods of measurement to enhance the significance of research findings
4，Misrepresenting speculations as fact or releasing preliminary research results, especially in the public media, without providing sufficient data to allow peers to judge the validity of the results or to reproduce the experiments.


韩被评为“最美丽教师”，简直就是一个笑话！！




https://replicationindex.wordpre ... r-better-practices/

http://www.veronaschools.org/cms ... 0it%20Important.pdf

MP4

smilingcloud 发表于 2016-9-7 16:23
没有受过科研训练的人，也不清楚科研道德与伦理。

就凭你这脑残能说人没有科研训练？
没有如果
那你的种种表现也属于SB呢至于ENG我直接SKIP，讲来讲去就是空话

MP4

《自然》都没说，就来讲科研道德，脑残已经到超自然的境界了

smilingcloud

自然 http://www.nature.com/news/go-forth-and-replicate-1.20473
To foster better behaviour, replication attempts must become more common. We urge researchers to open their file drawers. We urge authors to cooperate with reasonable requests for primary data, to assume good intent and to write papers — and keep records — assuming that others will want to replicate their work. We urge funders and publishers to support tools that help researchers to thread the literature together. We welcome, and will be glad to help disseminate, results that explore the validity of key publications, including our own.


盖坦·布尔焦 https://medium.com/@GaetanBurgio ... 00b5a4d1#.yhgixc9rl

Once again, if the authors of this paper wish to restore any form of credibility over their technique, they must share their raw data and full and detailed protocols for us to understand why we are unable to replicate this. The distillation of few tips through the media outlets is irritating at least.


QRP，Questionable research practice  
Questionable research practices are actions that violate traditional values of the research enterprise and that may be detrimental to the research process.
Refusing to give peers reasonable access to unique research materials or data that support published papers.
Misrepresenting speculations as fact or releasing preliminary research results, especially in the public media, without providing sufficient data to allow peers to judge the validity of the results or to reproduce the experiments.

韩春雨 http://www.thepaper.cn/newsDetail_forward_1511909
实验室外对话韩春雨：公布所有数据不就等于韩寒公布手稿吗？
当记者询问公开更多数据是否有利于重复实验的开展时，韩春雨的回答是否定的：“公布也没用，那不等于韩寒公布手稿吗？”
8月10日下午，《自然》杂志工作人员回复媒体称，韩春雨未将该版本实验细节提交给《自然》，暂无可以对外公开的调查进展。

MP4

韩春雨事件调查尚无最终结果

[p=30, null, left]    科技日报上海9月6日电 （记者王怡）9月5日，韩春雨接受成都商报采访时称，《自然》杂志已证实实验可重复。9月6日，施普林格·自然集团大中华区总裁刘珺告诉科技日报记者：“对于韩春雨论文的调查，我们目前还维持之前的官方回应，尚未有新的结果公布。”

http://digitalpaper.stdaily.com/http_www.kjrb.com/kjrb/html/2016-09/07/content_348960.htm

脑残超自然的能力就是高

smilingcloud

《自然》在8月8日发表的文章是一篇由《自然》新闻团队所做的新闻报道，不应该被认为是验证该研究的真性。
The article published in Nature on August 8th is a piece of journalistic reporting by the Nature’s news team and should not be considered to be validation of the integrity of the research.

MP4

smilingcloud 发表于 2016-9-7 20:42
《自然》在8月8日发表的文章是一篇由《自然》新闻团队所做的新闻报道，不应该被认为是验证该研究的真性。
T ...

你所谓的写入科研道德教育在哪里？