121
Genetics journal retracts 18 papers from China due to human rights concerns
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 17 Feb 2024
121 points (94.2% liked)
World News
33090 readers
621 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Tibet and Xinjiang are literally autonomous ethnic regions that are under local governments of Tibetans and Uighurs, respectively. No one has any concerns about the poor donating plasma or Canadians pushing euthanasia to the poor, but you're gonna just smear scientists because of Westoid propaganda?
Free Tibet into the hands of CIA tool Dalai “Suck My Tongue” Lama.
OK, but what if every opinion I have about Tibet has been formed by that one Brad Pitt movie where he plays a literal SS officer?
Gen x spooked.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3zDn39VogY
Am gen x, was a
propagandized by the zeitgeist: Tibetan Freedom Concert
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://www.piped.video/watch?v=e3zDn39VogY
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://www.piped.video/watch?v=e3zDn39VogY
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Tibet and Xinjiang are part of China because they want to. Can we say the same about Texas?
This is the real issue I have with all Chinese reporting: by government policy, they have proportional ethnic representation (and often overrepresent minorities in government in autonomous regions). Yes, it's still technically the CPC, but it's like saying that the BC NDP and federal NDP are the same party with the same interests.
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.