Who are you adressing? The guardian article refers to retractions in multiple journals.
Also, people are worried about socioeconomic factors involved in plasma donation and euthanasia. As they should be. These are always important to be aware of and to actively try to preempt.
These things don’t absolve the retracted papers from criticism. Nor do they exclude any other research from close scrutiny
The point is this isn’t “criticism”. It’s just a journal trying to legitimize western propaganda and slow down China’s inevitable rise to the top in scientific research, like they’re trying to do in other fields like computing. This article doesn’t admit it outright, but the last paragraph shows they seem to understand that quite well.
Who are you adressing? The guardian article refers to retractions in multiple journals.
Also, people are worried about socioeconomic factors involved in plasma donation and euthanasia. As they should be. These are always important to be aware of and to actively try to preempt.
These things don’t absolve the retracted papers from criticism. Nor do they exclude any other research from close scrutiny
The point is this isn’t “criticism”. It’s just a journal trying to legitimize western propaganda and slow down China’s inevitable rise to the top in scientific research, like they’re trying to do in other fields like computing. This article doesn’t admit it outright, but the last paragraph shows they seem to understand that quite well.