忍不住发一篇NATURE对叶妹妹的怀疑文，欠抽！

暮已央 · 发表于 2012-8-3 14:02:36

今天看到的，觉得实在忍不住吐槽就发上来了，NATURE作为科学类杂志的权威，这么说也是有些偏见了吧！
不说废话，大家看文！原网址是
http://www.nature.com/news/why-great-olympic-feats-raise-suspicions-1.11109
P.S.童鞋们，原文且不说，底下的评论都是大亮啊大亮！看原网一定要看评论！
目测应该都是我国各杰出人才及优秀科学家！
反驳的水平均是A++级别，完败Argument和ISSUE！
Why great Olympic feats raise suspicions
'Performance profiling' could help to dispel doubts.

Ewen Callaway

01 August 2012Chinese swimmer Ye Shiwen broke the world record for the women's 400-metre individual medley event at the Olympic Games on 28 July.
L. Neal /AFP / Getty Images

At the Olympics, how fast is too fast? That question has dogged Chinese swimmer Ye Shiwen after the 16-year-old shattered the world record in the women's 400-metre individual medley (400 IM) on Saturday. In the wake of that race, some swimming experts wondered whether Ye’s win was aided by performance-enhancing drugs. She has never tested positive for a banned substance and the International Olympic Committee on Tuesday declared that her post-race test was clean. The resulting debate has been tinged with racial and political undertones, but little science. Nature examines whether and how an athlete's performance history and the limits of human physiology could be used to catch dopers.
Was Ye’s performance anomalous?Yes. Her time in the 400 IM was more than 7 seconds faster than her time in the same event at a major meet in July. But what really raised eyebrows was her showing in the last 50 metres, which she swam faster than US swimmer Ryan Lochte did when he won gold in the men’s 400 IM on Saturday, with the second-fastest time ever for that event.
Doesn't a clean drug test during competition rule out the possibility of doping?No, says Ross Tucker, an exercise physiologist at the University of Cape Town in South Africa. Athletes are much more likely to dope while in training, when drug testing tends to be less rigorous. “Everyone will pass at the Olympic games. Hardly anyone fails in competition testing,” Tucker says.
Out-of-competition tests are more likely to catch dopers, he says, but it is not feasible to test every elite athlete regularly year-round. Tracking an athlete over time and flagging anomalous performances would help anti-doping authorities to make better use of resources, says Yorck Olaf Schumacher, an exercise physiologist at the Medical University of Freiburg in Germany, who co-authored a 2009 paper proposing that performance profiling be used as an anti-doping tool¹. “I think it’s a good way and a cheap way to narrow down a large group of athletes to suspicious ones, because after all, the result of any doping is higher performance,” Schumacher says.
The ‘biological passport’, which measures characteristics of an athlete’s blood to look for physiological evidence of doping, works in a similar way to performance profiling (see 'Racing just to keep up'). After it was introduced in 2008, cycling authorities flagged irregularities in the blood characteristics of Antonio Colom, a Spanish cyclist, and targeted drug tests turned up evidence of the banned blood-boosting hormone erythropoietin (EPO) in 2009.
How would performance be used to nab dopers?Anti-doping authorities need a better way of flagging anomalous performances or patterns of results, says Schumacher. To do this, sports scientists need to create databases that — sport by sport and event by event — record how athletes improve with age and experience. Longitudinal records of athletes’ performances would then be fed into statistical models to determine the likelihood that they ran or swam too fast, given their past results and the limits of human physiology.
The Olympic biathlon, a winter sport that combines cross-country skiing and target shooting, has dabbled in performance profiling. In a pilot project, scientists at the International Biathlon Union in Salzburg, Austria, and the University of Ferrara in Italy, developed a software program that retroactively analysed blood and performance data from 180 biathletes over six years to identify those most likely to have doped². The biathlon federation now uses the software to target its athletes for drug testing.
Could an athlete then be disciplined simply for performing too well?“That would be unfair,” says Tucker. “The final verdict is only ever going to be reached by testing. It has to be.” In recent years, cycling authorities have successfully prosecuted athletes for having anomalous blood profiles, even when banned substances such as EPO could not be found. But performance is too far removed from taking a banned substance and influenced by too many outside factors to convict someone of doping, Tucker says. “When we look at this young swimmer from China who breaks a world record, that’s not proof of anything. It asks a question or two.”

Journal name:
Nature DOI: doi:10.1038/nature.2012.11109

Canadians · 发表于 2012-8-3 22:29:34

不错啊好文章请教一下这类文章能被出成考题么

babybearmm · 发表于 2012-8-3 23:48:31

赞lz分享~~我昨天也看到这个了，真的是对Nature大跌眼镜啊！全文都可以编成GMAT的AWA题目了....
下面的回复比原文好多了，尤其是Lai Jiang的，看得我真痛快！

babybearmm · 发表于 2012-8-4 10:29:35

哟~~这还搞言论屏蔽啊~~~~Nature真有理的~
好在我当时居然把所有原文&评论保存到PDF文档里了，留下了详实证据。贴在CD这里分享下

谢谢楼主分享。Baby提到的Lai Jiang的评论原文已经没有了，事实上8月1日的评论都不见了。nature编辑解释说违反了Nature的某某条例的那些评论被删除了，评论太多了也导致最前面的一些评论不见了。就不追究到底为什么Lai Jiang的评论不见了，我找到了另有一位评论者重新贴出的Lai Jiang的回复。写得有理有据，这才是有说服力的文章。引用如下：

-- by 会员 iamyingjie (2012/8/4 9:52:47)

babybearmm · 发表于 2012-8-4 10:47:18

再贴一个

2012-08-03 01:35 AMReport this comment | #48168
Jon Song said:
Groundless report charging Chinese Athlete of doping 1 message Song, Qiang <**********> Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 10:28 PM To: Philip Campbell <*********>, Diane Yorke <*********> Cc: Brian Owens <***********> Dear Editor,
I am writing to bring your attention to a recent report by Mr. Ewen Callaway, which intentionally associate a great Chinese athlete Ye Shiwen with "cheaters" and "doping" without any solid evidence and rigorous statistical support (http://www.nature.com/news/why-great-olympic-feats-raise-suspicions-1.11109#comment-47487).

This report suffers from several fallacies. First, Mr. Callaway cherry-picked the example that Ye outperformed Lochte in the last 50meter of 400 meter IM, and tried to prove that Ye's performance is abnormal. But he obviously failed to mentioned that Ye was 23.25 seconds slower than Lochte in the 400meter swimming, and the Ye's good at free style swimming.
Second, Mr. Callaway seems to ignore the principle of "presumption of innocence". While International Olympic Committee on Tuesday announced that Ye's post-race test was clean, and Mr. Callaway has no additional evidence to support his prejudice. It is unprofessional for Nature to publish this groundless report.

Mr. Callaway's report has seriously damaged the reputation of Nature as one of the most prestigious scientific journals. The argument and the statistical methods presented in that report is misleading to the general public. Additionally, it hurts the feeling of those Olympiad athletes who have been sweating to compete in Olympic Games.

I hope that you and your editorial board look into this issue as soon as possible. Mr. Callaway should respond to the critical comments posted by other reads in your website. It is also advisable for Nature to retract the report if Mr. Callaway cannot address those issues raised by other comments.

Sincerely,
Song Qiang

University of Southern California

===
Readers of Nature have commented on the report in the past two days. Below are two excellent commentaries by Mr.Echt Warsteiner and Mr. Lai Jiang.
For unknown reasons, these two commentaries have been deleted from Nature website. I have archived them and attached them below for your reference.

2012-08-02 04:02 AM Report this comment | #47760 Echt Warsteiner said: Congratulations, Nature! Mr. Callaway has single-handedly helped your smooth transformation from prestigious scientific landmark towards a brand new tabloid, successfully. Instead of "International Journal of Science", now you are busy with rumors and second-guessing, and backed up by strong conviction â??I don't have any proof, as a matter of fact, all official testing result just proven my suspicion unfounded and completely wrong, but I don't care about truth. I just stay firm on my belief, those Chinese are cheaters. Half truth is sometimes a lot worse and deliberately misleading than a whole lie. For instance, the headline â??Ye is faster than the fastest man in her last 50M. How wrong could that be? If I hear that I would immediately raise the same question as well, is Ye clean? However, as we all know now, that 50M from that supposedly fastest man Lochte, was a completely slowed down cruising to his gold medal, which only ranked 5th in the same race. As if put the word "scientific" in front of your profiling, makes all the consistent accusation without proof, or even proven to be wrong, "scientific". Thorpe smashed his own record by 8 seconds at age of 15; Phelps improved his own record by 4 seconds at age of 15; Rice even shortened her own record by 6 second; Missy Franklin won gold only 13 minutes after her exhausting 200 free semi; Ruta Meilutyte came out of nowhere and jumped from 14th place in the world to Olympic gold. Those were all exceptional and dramatic improvement achievements, in other words "incredible" or "unbelievable". But those data would not trigger your "scientific" profiling, because they don't pass the MOST important criteria â??China. As American hero Carl Lewis put it clearly, "Who cares I failed drug tests?". Exactly, he's no Chinese. Mr. Callaway, thank you for being honest with us on the end. As you sited <b>"Tucker says. 'When we look at this young swimmer from China who breaks a world record, thatÃ¢â?¬â?¢s not proof of anything. It asks a question or two.'"</b> How generous and kind of you? You don't have proof, but you just have suspicions, IF you are Chinese, and if you do well. Something must be wrong. Even vigorous test results were published before and after the race, and ten times more in the past 2 years, proved Ye is clean, "we" still don't buy it. After all, your scientific profiling just consists of five simple letters â??C-H-I-N-A. When my wife published a paper on Nature many years ago, she was excited and proud, and I was proud of her as well, because I felt that was the real recognition of her achievement. Now, I just realized, it's really not that hard, anti-China will just do the trick. It's election year, normally it's time for politicians to step up the China bashing game. It's not only politically correct, but also fashionable to blame China on everything and anything. Better yet, accusing China or Chinese is the easiest job, because you don't need any proof, "red commie China" is automatically associated with any evil doings. Chinese won't get onto the street, and Chinese won't get TV time to say they are offended. More importantly, Chinese won't get organized to affect any voting meaningfully. Why should Nature shy away from the party? Where do I sign up to celebrate Nature's new-found territory?
2. 2012-08-02 02:18 AM

teddybearj4 · 发表于 2012-8-4 13:29:15

谢谢大家的分享啊~Lai Jiang写的真好啊！！！

我们中国人得到好成绩都要被西方一些人的偏见这样的否定，想想就泪目~

xjbb · 发表于 2012-8-4 17:21:54

真不错，谢谢小暮和baby！
所以说学习英文还是很重要的，避免在需要为自己申辩的时候开不了口～于是动力又增加了一个！

忍不住发一篇NATURE对叶妹妹的怀疑文，欠抽！

本帖子中包含更多资源

所属分类: GMAT考试

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()

浏览过的版块