评论
打印
Eight years ago, a team of researchers launched a project to carefully repeat early and influential lab experiments in cancer research.
八年前，一组研究人员启动了一个项目，以仔细重复早期和有影响力的癌症研究的实验室实验。
The Reproducibility Project as it is called recreated 50 experiments.
可再现性项目，即“重现50个实验”。
Now, it reports that about half of the experiments did not produce the results reported originally.
现在，它报告称，大约一半的实验没有产生最初报告的结果。
The reproducibility of experiments and confirmation of results is central to wide acceptance of scientific claims.
实验的可再现性和结果的证实是科学主张被广泛接受的核心。
"The truth is we fool ourselves. Most of what we claim is novel or significant is no such thing," said Dr. Vinay Prasad.
维奈·普拉萨德医生说：“事实是我们在自欺欺人。我们所声称的大多数新奇或有重大意义的研究结果都不是真的。”
He is a cancer doctor and researcher at the University of California, San Francisco and was not involved in the project.
他是加利福尼亚大学旧金山分校的癌症医生和研究人员。他没有参与这个项目。
Most scientists believe that the strongest findings come from experiments that can be repeated with similar results.
大多数科学家认为，最有力的研究结论来自可以重复得到类似结果的实验。
But there is little reason for researchers to share methods and data so others can confirm the work, said Marcia McNutt.
玛西娅·麦克纳特表示，但研究人员几乎没有理由分享方法和数据，以便其他人能够证实这项研究。
She is president of the National Academy of Sciences.
她是美国国家科学院院长。
Researchers lose respect in the scientific community if their results do not hold up to careful study, she added.
她还说，如果研究人员的研究结果经不起仔细研究，他们就会在科学界失去尊重。
For the project, the researchers tried to repeat experiments from cancer biology papers.
在这个项目中，研究人员试图重复癌症生物学论文中的实验。
The papers had appeared in major scientific publications, including Nature and Cell, from 2010 to 2012.
从2010年到2012年，这些论文被发表在包括《自然》和《细胞》在内的主要科学出版物上。
Overall, 54 percent of the original findings failed to meet conditions set by the Reproducibility Project.
总体而言，54%的原始研究结果未能满足可再现性项目所设定的条件。
The team's study appears in the journal eLife.
该团队的研究发表在《eLife》杂志上。
The nonprofit eLife receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, which also supports The Associated Press Health and Science Department.
非营利组织eLife得到了霍华德·休斯医学研究所的支持，该研究所也支持美联社健康与科学部。
Among the studies that did not hold up was one that claimed a link between a stomach bacteria and colon cancer.
在那些经不起推敲的研究中，有一项声称一种胃里的细菌与结肠癌之间存在联系。
Another claimed a drug had shrunk tumors in mice.
另一项研究声称，一种药物缩小了老鼠体内的肿瘤。
And, a third was a mouse study of a possible prostate cancer drug.
又一项研究是把一种可能的治疗前列腺癌的药物注射入老鼠体内。
This is the second major study by the Reproducibility Project.
这是可再现性项目的第二项主要研究。
In 2015, they found similar problems when they tried to repeat experiments in psychology.
2015年，当他们试图重复心理学实验时发现了类似的问题。
Study co-writer Brian Nosek of the Center for Open Science said it can be wasteful to move forward without first doing the work to repeat findings.
开放科学中心的研究合著者布莱恩·诺塞克表示，如果不先做已有研究结果的重复实验就继续前进可能是一种浪费。
The researchers tried to limit differences in how the cancer experiments were carried out.
研究人员试图限制癌症实验进行方式的差异。
Often, they could not get help from the scientists who did the original work.
通常，他们无法从最初做实验的科学家那里得到帮助。
They could not get answers to questions such as which kinds of mice to use or where to find specially engineered tumor cells.
他们无法得到诸如使用哪种老鼠或在哪里找到特殊编辑过的肿瘤细胞等问题的答案。
Michael Lauer is a deputy director of research at the National Institutes of Health.
迈克尔·劳尔是美国国立卫生研究院研究部的副主任。
He said, "I wasn't surprised, but it is concerning that about a third of scientists were not helpful, and, in some cases, were beyond not helpful."
他说：“我并不感到惊讶，但令人担忧的是，大约三分之一的科学家没有帮忙，在某些情况下，他们甚至完全不帮忙。”
Lauer added that the NIH plans to require data-sharing among organizations to which it provides support in 2023.
劳尔还说，美国国立卫生研究院计划在2023年要求它所支持的组织之间共享数据。
Dr. Glenn Begley is a bio-technology advisor and former head of cancer research at drugmaker Amgen.
格伦·贝格利博士是生物技术顾问，也是制药商安进公司癌症研究部门的前负责人。
Ten years ago, he and other scientists at Amgen reported even lower rates of confirmation when they tried to repeat published cancer experiments.
十年前，他和安进公司的其他科学家报告称，当他们试图重复已发表的癌症实验时，证实率更低。
Cancer research is difficult, Begley said.
贝格利说，癌症研究很困难。
He added that "it is very easy for researchers to be attracted to results that look exciting and provocative, results that appear to further support their favorite idea as to how cancer should work, but that are just wrong."
他还说：“研究人员很容易被那些看起来令人兴奋和挑衅性的结果所吸引，这些结果似乎进一步支持了他们最喜欢的有关癌症应该如何工作的观点，但那是错误的。”
I'm Jonathan Evans.
乔纳森·埃文斯为您播报。
译文为可可英语翻译，未经授权请勿转载！
