原创翻译:龙腾网  翻译:haleyyen



China could surpass the US and becomethe world’s leading investor in scientific and medical research by 2022


A new study hasclaimed that the US’ status as the world’s leading nation in scientific andmedical research is under threat.


University ofMichigan researchers reviewed every issue of six top-tier internationaljournals and four mid-tier journals from 2000 to 2015.


While theresearchers concluded that the US is still the world leader in research anddevelopment spending, and ranks first in the world for scientific discoveries,China’s increased investment in science over the past two decades means that itcan now provide the US with serious competition and ranks fourth in the worldfor total number of new discoveries.

尽管研究人员得出结论,美国现在仍然是世界上研发经费最大的国家, 并且科研发现的数量居世界首位, 但是在过去二十年里中国在科研方面不断增加的投资表明,它现在可以与美国相匹敌,新发现的总量居世界第四。

However, proposedbudget cuts in the US, and the belief that Chinese R&D spending willsurpass the US total by 2022 could mean that China eventually becomes theleading nation for scientific and medical research.


“It’s time for USpolicy makers to reflect and decide whether the year-to-year uncertainty inNational Institutes of Health budget and the proposed cuts are in our societaland national best interest,” said Bishr Omary, M.D., Ph.D. and chief scientificofficer of Michigan Medicine, U-M’s academic medical center.

” 是时候让美国的决策者们反思,关于美国国立卫生研究院( NIH ) 不明的年度预算和减少开支的提议等等,到底如何对我们的国家和社会最有利。” 说话者 Bishr Omary 医学博士是密西根大学医学研究中心的首席科学家。

“If we continue onthe path we’re on, it will be harder to maintain our lead and, even moreimportantly, we could be disenchanting the next generation of bright andpassionate biomedical scientists who see a limited future in pursuing ascientist or physician-investigator career.”


Rather than beinga dominant force in scientific and medical research, the researchers discoveredthat the US were now more likely than ever to cooperate with other nations onpeer-reviewed papers.


It is thought thatstagnating budgets in the US, Great Britain and other European countries, aswell as Canada and Australia, have ushered in an era of “team science” in thelast 15 years.


In 2000, 25% ofpapers in the six top-tier journals were by teams that included researchersfrom at least two countries.


However, in 2015that figure was closer to 50%. The increasing need for multidisciplinaryapproaches to make major advances, coupled with the advances of Internet-basedcollaboration tools were likely have something to do with this, Omary said.

但是,在2015年,这个数字近50%。运用多学科方法而实现突破的需求日益增加,还有以互联网为基础的协作工具的发展,都可能与此有关, omary博士表示。

The researchersnoted that while their study was based on data up to 2015, in the current 2017federal fiscal year, National Institutes of Health budget increased thanks tobipartisan Congressional appropriations.


But the proposedcuts to research funding in the 2018 budget could hinder many areas of researchand negatively impact the next generation of aspiring scientists.


“Our analysis,albeit limited to a small number of representative journals, supports theimportance of financial investment in research,” Omary says.


“I would stillstrongly encourage any child interested in science to pursue their dream andpassion, but I hope that our current and future investment in NIH and otherfederal research support agencies will rise above any branch of government tohelp our next generation reach their potential and dreams.”



That’s great news.Now the US can steal China’s IP.


Yeah, but where’sthe manufacturing sector to build that stolen IP?


They’re also theleading investor in fake research

This shouldterrify the world just as much as excite.



Why would anybodybut the Chinese be excited by this news?


Large improvementsin technology tend to benefit everyone in a global economy.


Research isn’t azero sum game.



The Chinese are arival and adversary, we’re competing economically, culturally, financially,geopolitically, etc. Obviously it’s bad for us if they pull ahead of us inresearch.


So are Americansto me. So what?


Maybe I don’t careabout America’s god given right to bomb civilians in whatever country they wantin the Middle East. Considering globally America is seen as the world’sgreatest threat to peace, most people don’t care about US hegemony and arehappy for research that might give us longer and happier lives.


Why would anyonenot be excited by this news? The medical research fight is against disease, notagainst other countries. Do you turn down medical treatment or refuse to usetechnology because it was developed by foreigners? I want every country toincrease their medical research. Even military research is often beneficial forthe whole world. The internet, GPS, and satellites were developed by the USdefense department, but now benefit the whole world. I don’t want the Chinese(my home country the USA) to get better at murdering people with drones, butthat is such a tiny piece of the research compared to all the good researchdone all over the world.


Not all medicalresearch is subsidized, it’s not just paid for by governments.

And not allresearch business is for profit, rather not-for-profit (different thannon-profit). These companies need other businesses to invest and work together,and this costs money and a lot of time. Companies won’t invest if the researchisn’t secured and safe then there is no incentive to invest.

Research takesyears, sharing the key knowledge takes 1 e-mail. There is a serious concernabout chinese researchers stealing research that way in EU (NL at least fromwhat I know). If stolen and fake research is so prent in China then Yes Ido have mixed feelings about this news.




If they startgetting more funding than researchers in the US and EU, thenmaybe theft of research won’t bee such a problem. The issue was always thatthey were catching up from way behind with little funding, and there was (is)intense competition for scarce resources.


So your argumentis basically that we should let them pass us so they don’t have to steal fromus anymore? Really?


Lol, you don’t getto ‘let’ them do anything. They’re gonna do it with or without your permission,and the world will benefit from it.

You guys are allabout America-first nationalism these days. You can go autofellate in thecorner and let the rest of the world move on without you. You abdicated yourrole as world leader.



Of course we’reletting them do it, or rather the leaders of our country are letting them do itand getting rich in the process. Our businesses built manufacturing plantsthere, they industrialize, they ship it over here and we buy it. Economicsanctions could end all that, China’s a paper tiger. The social contract withwhich the Chinese people allow the overtly authoritarian CCP to rule is basedentirely off of the CCP’s ability to deliver continued economic prosperity.They’ve been able to ensure that since the 80’s due to American investment, butit could disappear much quicker than it appeared and as soon as they enter arecession it’s going to be Tiananmen x10. An absurd amount China’s capital isstuck in long term infrastructure projects like the New Silk Road and all oftheir half-empty mega-cities. On top of this, they’ve got a huge problemwith capital flight, specifically because the Chinese elite know that thecountry’s a powder keg ready to blow.


It’s completelylost on me why so many Westerners have this idea in their head that China issome kind of unstoppable economic juggernaut. China’s entire economy ispredicated on the hope that Americans will continue to invest in their countryand buy their cheap shit. Cheap labor is overly abundant, they need ourconsumer market but we don’t need their labor. Southeast Asia and Latin Americaare quickly becoming cheaper due to Chinese wage hikes, despite their currencyduations.

And lol, you thinkthe world’s going to move on without us? We are the world. The UN,IMF, World Bank all exist because we allow them to. They’re ways for us toleverage soft power projection. If we cut funding and backed out of any ofthese organizations, they would be drastically less capable and would more thanlikely lose their legit


y just like the League of Nations. At the end of theday, might makes right and we’re by far the mightiest. We could completely haltall development and advancement and we’d still be a major player for decades tocome. We’re not going anywhere bud.


笑,你以为没了我们地球还会转吗?我们就是世界。联合国、国际货币基金组织、世界银行,这些机构之所以存在是因为我们允许他们存在。它们是我们发展软实力的方式。如果我们削减资金并退出这些组织中的任何一个,他们的能力将会大大降低,而且可能会像国际联盟一样失去其合法性。 也许有一天情况会变化,但到现在为止我们一直是最强大的。我们完全可以阻断所有的发展和进步,在未来的几十年里,我们仍然是一个重要的玩家。我们一直都在这里。

First, the USneeds China’s trade as much as China needs America’s. It would be an economicdisaster for both countries if the US were to embargo China. And once their NewSilk Road is complete, their dependence on US trade begins to vanish. Yourpicture of China depending entirely on US trade is stuck in the 90s.

Buying shit fromthem wasn’t charity; they straight out-competed the US.


从他们那里买垃圾商品不是慈善; 他们超过了美国。

We are the world.

Yeah, and so wasGreat Britain at one point. The international organizations you mention werecreated by the US, largely for the benefit of the US, and China is already launchingcompetitors. It’s in America’s interest–but not necessarily China’s–for theUS to keep funding those organizations.

You’re right thatChina is a bit of a powder-keg, and the rich are happy to keep their moneyabroad. It’s not totally clear their experiment will succeed.




The US does notneed China’s trade. What China brings to the table is cheap labor and that isvery easily replaced. Southeast Asia and Latin America are already beginning tooutcompete China in that regard. But what the US has is not replaceable. The USalone is <25% of the world’s consumer market. China’s entire economy isbuilt around exporting to that market, were the US to embargo China it wouldnot be able to replace what it lost. Sure, the immediate short term effectswould be recession for both sides, but in the long term the US could easilyreplace China with the aforementioned regions. There’s no way to replaceAmerican consumerism, at least not in any reasonable amount of time that couldhelp China avoid existential disaster.


And I’m glad youbrought up the AIIB, because it highlights the point I was making aboutlegitimacy. When the US creates an organization like the World Bank, it isn’tjust any financial institution that loans to countries, it is the financialinstitution that loans to countries. If you’re not in the World Bank, you’reeither a microstate like Andorra or you’re a pariah like North Korea. AIIBdoesn’t have any guise of obxtivity and global supremacy, it’s just anotherarm of the Chinese government.


I’m European andI’m excited about this. Why would I not be? Just because Americans aren’texcited about this doesn’t mean the rest of the world isn’t.


Canadian here andim excited. Silly US citizen…


German here, I’mnot excited about it. I don’t like the idea of China being hegemon.


Does it reallymatter from which country innovation comes from? Isn’t competition always good?


Depends on how thepower is wielded. That’s the general answer to your general question.

If the scientificresearch and medical research is used mostly for military gains and the plan isto use a majority of that research to kill instead of help, then I can see itbeing bad. This is the glass half empty viewpoint in contrast to your half fullview.

I’m not sayingChina will do this, just that the vague information we are given is open ended.




The fakeresearch part

Like the ones thatthe sugar industry in the US bought in the 60’s?



(译者注:一个称为糖业研究基金(Sugar Research Foundation)的商业集团,也就是今天的糖业协会的前身,在1967年花大价钱聘请三位哈佛大学的科学家发表一篇关于糖类、脂肪和心血管疾病研究的评论文章评论中引用的研究都是经过糖业集团特意挑选的结果,整篇文章极力弱化糖类与心血管疾病之间的关联,并极力将“屎盆子”扣向饱和脂肪酸。http://dy.163.com/v2/article/T1460535614076/C0VBBK7B05119734)

That doesn’tjustify other people doing it?


It totallydoesn’t, but why the concern with the research in China and not with theresearch in the US, EU or other parts of the world?


I agree thatpeople do voice concern about fake research, but here it seems to me that theconcern is only because it’s from China. I might totally be wrong though


The thing is thatChina does not want to be the world’s factory and importing pollution andexporting the fruits of cheap labor. Industrialization is only a step towardsmodern, consumer based economy. Sooner or later, they will and their owncitizens will demand the same safety regulations, environmental protection actsand minimum wages. Who wants their children to work in factories underhorrible conditions and get paid pittance. Everything they are doing is playingcatch up. Once they are done, they will export that shit to other countries.


Edit: seem like alot of people do not really understand China as the usual trope keep popping uplike how China is a communist country, how the people have no say and powerbecause it is not a democracy, as though the Chinese are just a bunch of stupidpeople who followed their leaders blindly. Most people here have utterly no senseof history, especially Chinese history. TBH, I do not condone the CCP or accepthow the Chinese think and behave on the international arena. But fair is fairand people should know what they are talking about before they start openingtheir mouth.


The Chinese areculturally tended towards commonality and conformism simply because the longsorry history of China demanded a certain amount of shared suffering that bindsextended family and even society together. This is something people in theWest, especially Americans can never fully understand.



电子邮件地址不会被公开。 必填项已用*标注