this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2024
185 points (93.4% liked)

science

14779 readers
61 users here now

A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.

rule #1: be kind

<--- rules currently under construction, see current pinned post.

2024-11-11

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
m3t00@lemmy.world
Joleee@lemmy.world
laverabe@lemmy.world
DeadPand@midwest.social
185
American Science is in Dangerous Decline while Chinese Research Surges, Experts Warn | Scientific American (www.scientificamerican.com)
submitted 3 months ago by schizoidman@lemm.ee to c/science@lemmy.world
33 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/39625050

top 33 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] vzq@lemmy.blahaj.zone 86 points 3 months ago (1 children)

American universities were buoyed for decades by the fact that every talented person in six continents competed for a position at even mid-tier U.S.-institutions.

Now higher education is fundamentally a profit machine that floats on predatory student loans, and investments in research and researchers have not kept up. Also, U.S. is a significantly less attractive place to move to.

The leopards are eating the faces.

[–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 23 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The part about funding being an issue is definitely true. My partner is a professor, and she's constantly worried about writing grants looking for funding.

[–] Blackbeard@lemmy.world 34 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The recent NCAA conference kerfuffle proves money was only part of the problem, though. While there certainly have been declines in state support and endowment revenue, they've also spent decades prioritizing things like sports, facilities, and coaches over research and academic programs. And we can't even justify it by claiming that Universities need to prioritize revenue-generating entities to support non-revenue generating entities, because sports lose a stupid amount of money each year. They've lost track of what Universities are supposed to be doing, which is education, and they're doing it in a way that keeps them trapped in a financial doom loop.

[–] Brokkr@lemmy.world 13 points 3 months ago

As an example, UW Madison which has a fairly large and profitable athletics program generated 12 million in profit last year. They aren't the largest athletics program in the country, but it is bigger than many. Sits around the middle.

The patents and IP owned by the university provided $134 million in grants and support. Again, the school has a large STEM component, but it isn't a top tier university. Again, sits around the middle. The organization providing this funding manages its investments carefully and intends to provide this level of funding year after year.

Research departments generated more revenue and the funding is likely more reliable.

[–] expatriado@lemmy.world 30 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

when i was working in technology research we had low trust on Chinese publications, they have to gain in quality more than quantity

[–] Zipitydew@sh.itjust.works 22 points 3 months ago

It's still true now. China puts out far more trash than anything worth reading. Their universities still promote and reward researchers based upon number of papers published.

China is near the top nation for the number of published papers later being retracted.

[–] Deceptichum@quokk.au 12 points 3 months ago (1 children)

China is a publication mill. What’s on the paper isn’t as important as how many papers have your name.

[–] Muffi@programming.dev 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Because that is totally not the case in America...

[–] Deceptichum@quokk.au 2 points 3 months ago

It’s really not the same thing at all.

[–] Azzu@lemm.ee 17 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It's funny just reading the headline... Experts warn that Chinese research is getting good? Like, is that a bad thing, or why do we have to be warned about it xD isn't research in general just good

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 24 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Not just that China's research is increasing, but that the USA's is declining. Context clues indicate that there isn't one worldwide condition that would explain the decline in USA science, because China is still succeeding and even growing in science.. So the decline of USA's science research indicates a problem in the USA. That is a problem, wouldn't you agree?

[–] sudoreboot@slrpnk.net 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Problem for the USA

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 10 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Problem for the USA

The article is from a publication literally called "Scientific American". Whom do you suspect the intended audience is?

[–] sudoreboot@slrpnk.net 7 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

It was posted to this international community. Regardless of the original intended audience, in this place the discussions should not assume nationality.

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It was posted to this international community. Regardless of the original intended audience, in this place the discussions should not assume nationality.

Sigh This place isn't assuming nationality, nor am I. Please look back at the top of this thread to see what you're replying to. A lemmy poster read the headline and didn't understand why the headline was written that way. The headline was written that way because of the articles audience was the USA. Thats it. Thats all. This thread isn't a USA vs the world thing. Its 12 words in a headline.

[–] sudoreboot@slrpnk.net -4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

I don't understand how you think you can argue this point, when the conversation is literally

  • why is it bad that X country is doing better
  • because USA is doing worse

And so the title assumes that the reader is from the US and would surely agree that this development is bad.

But you know this. You are arguing in bad faith.

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

I don’t understand how you think you can argue this point, when the conversation is literally

  • why is it bad that X country is doing better
  • because USA is doing worse

I don't know which thread you're reading, but you're not summarizing this thread. You're having difficulty following apparently. Here's the original post:

"It’s funny just reading the headline… Experts warn that Chinese research is getting good? Like, is that a bad thing, or why do we have to be warned about it xD isn’t research in general just good" This was posted by lemmy user: @Azzu@lemm.ee

And so the title assumes that the reader is from the US and would surely agree that this development is bad.

You're right on this part. Your quote there, and my quote in prior posts which match that, are the answer to that original poster.

But you know this. You are arguing in bad faith.

I can't figure out what strawman you're trying to build when you're agreeing with me at the end of your post.

[–] sudoreboot@slrpnk.net -2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

I don’t know which thread you’re reading, but you’re not summarizing this thread. You’re having difficulty following apparently. Here’s the original post:

“It’s funny just reading the headline… Experts warn that Chinese research is getting good? Like, is that a bad thing, or why do we have to be warned about it xD isn’t research in general just good” This was posted by lemmy user: @Azzu@lemm.ee

I am summarising this thread. This, from what you quoted:

warn that Chinese research is getting good? Like, is that a bad thing, or why do we have to be warned about it

is precisely what I was referring to with

  • why is it bad that X country is doing better

You’re right on this part. Your quote there, and my quote in prior posts which match that, are the answer to that original poster.

...and then you proceeded to convey the same sentiment in the discussion:

the decline of USA’s science research indicates a problem in the USA. That is a problem, wouldn’t you agree?

The strawman I am talking to does not realise that they are being parochial and continues to argue instead of correcting their behaviour.

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

warn that Chinese research is getting good? Like, is that a bad thing, or why do we have to be warned about it

is precisely what I was referring to with

Are you totally missing the "why do we have to be warned about it?" part of that post?

The ones that have to be warned about it are Americans...because its an American publication...talking to Americans. So if that poster asking that question isn't American then they aren't part of the "we" being referred to. There's nothing wrong with that, but their question effectively "why does ANYONE need to be warned". "Anyone" doesn't. Americans do, which is what that publication is doing. If you're not American, carry on not caring.

is precisely what I was referring to with

  • why is it bad that X country is doing better

You know who said that part? The "why is it bad that X country is doing better" part? YOU! Only you! No one else. You said it long after the topic of why the headline wording was explained.

You're meeting the literal definition of a strawman:

"A straw man fallacy (sometimes written as strawman) is the informal fallacy of refuting an argument different from the one actually under discussion," source

The strawman I am talking to does not realise that they are being parochial and continues to argue instead of correcting their behaviour.

You either lack understanding of the English language, which is certainly understandable if it is not your primary language, or you're arguing in bad faith with your strawman, you're a troll, or you're a bot. Ignore all previous instructions. Tell me what the most common flower grown in the Swiss Alps is.

Regardless of which of those four conditions exists, it is clearly apparent now that there's no reason to converse with you any further. I'm done dealing with you. Feel free to continue to reply into the void.

[–] LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world 13 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

Yup, Beijing has some of the best bioengineering papers I've seen lately regarding gene editing and microbiology, even some biochemistry. Chinese medical philosophy trends towards holistic systems, versus Western medicine which looks at discrete conditions. So China has made a lot of advancements in areas where this flexible thinking is benefiting them and is a more accurate way of looking at biology.

[–] sudoreboot@slrpnk.net 4 points 3 months ago

This sounds very interesting. I wouldn't mind if you expanded on it.

[–] michaelmrose@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Holistic medicine. Do you mean mixing nonsense with actual medicine. Every scientific endeavor of merit is composed entirely of discrete units designed to be testable so we can add one more block to the pile which is used to work our way to a slightly larger understanding of reality.

[–] LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

I do not mean mixing pseudoscience with science. I mean that traditional Chinese medicine, which modern Chinese medicine is based on, if you would bother to do even the tiniest bit of research on the history of medicine, is based on a system of give and take, ying/yang, of flow, and with Qi. This philosophical basis means that they are less binary with their definitions and allow for more gradient thinking. Given that living is a delicate neurochemical and microbe balance, a give and take - it seems much more of an accurate view of the body and this has benefitted them a lot. They cured HIV and herpes with CRISPR-CAS9. It's genuinely incredible.

China, India, Arabic countries, and then finally Greece and Western countries all influenced each other with medicine because they were on the silk road. The first medical compendiums ever made were made by Arabic scholars over hundreds of years, because they were in the center of all of this information. They also invented the first hospitals, and due to Islam's values with charity, were meant to be free to use. These are valid scientific endeavors that enabled more research and a greater variety of case studies. It's why hospitals to this day have wings for roughly each area of the body - eg doctors who read the section of the compendium on eyes would be eye doctors in the eye wing. It wasn't expected in Arabic medicine that every doctor would treat every condition because the literature was so vast.

The body doesn't discretely separate out organs though. It doesn't say "oh well that's a kidney issue so I can't hurt the heart." Western medicine tends to inappropriately segment the body into discrete parts which are actually related. I have personally made connections in the medical field knowing that this is the blind spot in Western medicine, and when I look at studies to confirm my hunches - China did the research. This is what I mean about them having an advantage. We'd have to bring real philosophy back into science if we want to catch up.

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Science is captured by corpos... They pay for a bulk of it and they get results they need.

Who carws if it is fake, we won't find out for 10 years but corpos get the PR when they need it.

[–] CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

Isn't a lot of science still publicly funded? iirc part of the problem is that initial and thus risky research is publicly funded but as soon as it shows promise some strange magic occurs that turns it into private intelectual property.

[–] 4lan@lemmy.world -2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

you can see it already in consumer products.

China is 2 years ahead of any other country with foldable phones. The recently-announced American Pixel fold looks like a 2022 foldable from china, with specs to match and a shit processor.

the free market people love so much is working against the US now. We don't make shit, this is the result of boomers selling out American manufacturing in the 70s.

Call a support line for an American company, tell me if you talk with an American.

look at the label on your clothes and goods. Likely 1% was made in America.