Over two yearsHan chun rainThesis event finally settled. According to the daily science and technology newspaper, hebei university of technology published the results of the school publication of the research and processing of the korean spring rain team's dissertation paper in its official web site, and the academy board carefully verified all the original experimental information involved in the paper and commissioned a repeat validation experiment from third-party national priority laboratories, concluding that the withdrawal paper no longer had a basis for re-publication and that no subjective forgery had been detected in the han spring rain team。
The results of the investigation and processing also stated that, since the publication of the paper, no changes had been made to the individual housing, job titles, salary entitlements, etc. In the course of the investigation, the korean spring rains initiated a request for the return of scientific research projects, performance awards, honours, social employment, etc., based on withdrawal papers. In accordance with the regulations, the korea spring rains team has been cancelled from its reputation, its scientific research project has been terminated and its funding recovered, and the korean spring rains team has been rewarded for its scientific research performance. Individual social work is being done in accordance with statutory procedures。
There are also a number of netizens who are confused about the results of the survey, and since it is not possible to repeat the experiment and re-published the dispossessed paper, which suggests that the korean spring rains team did not really achieve breakthrough scientific results, why say that the korean spring rains were not subjective? From an academic point of view, it is not an example of a misperception that a significant discovery is made and then a paper is published, and the normal course of action is to withdraw the manuscript. Internet users question the results of the investigation in connection with the lack of further details published by the school on “no subjective forgery found”, which requires that the school give the public a convincing finding。
Looking back at the korean spring rains, hebei university of technology has been dissatisfied with netizens and the scientific community. On 2 may 2016, han spring rain, as the author of the newsletter, published a paper entitled ngago-g dna-led genetic editing techniques in nature biotechnology. The paper, which was hailed as the “noor prize”, found that the associate professor han chun rain had become famous, but was then challenged that he could not repeat the experiment, that he had initially uploaded the information on the particles to a non-profit organization of global scientists sharing the particles, addgene, and that “it was bold to repeat his experiments”. Soon, however, the spring rain stopped responding, and the reason he said was “school told me not to respond”。
The hebei university of technology stated to the media that within a month, the korean spring rains would take the appropriate form of public validation, with authoritative third-party testimony, but the school did not take any further action. Instead, at the inaugural ceremony in 2016, the rector of the university, sun tsuruo, stated in his speech that: “the (schools) have a team of teachers who are carefully responsible for teaching and are innovative in their research, especially young teachers who are like the korean spring rains.” this post is part of our special coverage of the korean revolution. This attitude in schools is also dissatisfied with the scientific community, and in october 2016 more scientists came forward to ask the hebei university of technology, where the korean spring rain is located, after 13 scientists made public statements that their laboratories were unable to repeat a new genetic editing technology that their team claimed had developed and called for a third-party investigation. But hebei university of technology did not “take over”, and it was only on 3 august 2017 that hebei university of technology issued a statement stating that “in view of the withdrawal of the paper, the school decided to initiate an academic review of the results of the study and related procedures”
From the results of the survey and treatment currently published in schools, the fact that the experiment could not be repeated has been confirmed, but the lack of specific details supports the determination that the rain is not subjective. From the point of view of finding that the experiment could not be repeated, the korean spring rains incident had settled, leaving a deep lesson to universities and the scientific community. Having achieved an outcome that is considered to be a major breakthrough, han spring rain has not only gained honour, but has also come up with titles and posts, a way in which academic resources are allocated in such a way that substance leads scholars to pursue their interests and can easily be a source of hypocrisy. It is time for those academic authorities who are reluctant to give money to young scholars in need of funding to wake up。
In terms of the reasons for the publication of the paper on why the korean spring rains could not repeat the experiment, the survey did not settle, which required the publication of more detailed survey information in schools. The school stated that it would be an opportunity to further the spirit of science and insist on “zero tolerance” for academic misconduct. That must be done, not just empty words。
