美国Rutgers大学讲席教授Wise Young（杨咏威）痛斥新语丝小组

bridged

  

    【编者按：方舟子在被武汉法院依法执行了对肖传国教授的赔款之后，恼羞成怒，教唆其追随者整理诬蔑肖教授的黑材料，并邮寄至美国NIH等相关机构以及肖氏手术的试点医院，企图混淆试听。近日，方的铁杆帮闲Yush不甘寂寞，化名新语丝用户小组(xyusergroup)，又将上述充满主观臆测和人身攻击的不实之词的所谓“公开信”，匿名张贴到Rutgers大学一个为脊柱损伤患者，患者家人朋友以及医生之间提供信息交流的网络论坛上。不料，其不可告人的目的被该论坛的管理者Young博士慧眼识破，方舟子一夥的卑劣企图可耻地破产。下面就是Young博士对Yush的回复，由星湖沙龙网友jimi翻译。】

   

   Wise Young，美国Rutgers大学讲席教授，细胞生物学和神经科学系主任、Keck国际合作神经科学中心主任，中国脊髓损伤研究协作组(China SCI Net)董事会联席主席。

   英文原文见： [www.starlakeporch.net]

   Wise Young简历见：[lifesci.rutgers.edu]        

美国Rutgers大学讲席教授Wise Young（杨咏威）痛斥新语丝小组





Wise Young（杨咏威）教授是美国美国Rutgers大学讲席教授、细胞生物学和神经科学系主任、Keck国际合作神经科学中心主任、中国脊髓损伤研究协作组(China SCI Net)董事会联席主席。Rutgers大学的脊髓损伤论坛，由他负责主持。
　　
　　香港中文大学的简介：
　　
　　杨咏威教授 (Dr. Wise Young) 是全球脊椎治疗权威之华裔学人，现担任新泽西州 罗格斯大学 (Rutgers University) 神经科学系 (Cell Biology & Neuroscience) 教授兼系主任，以致力协助脊椎伤患恢复身心能力而在医学界有「神经建造者」或「神经建筑师」之誉。他于 2001 年获《时代》杂志选为美国十八位最佳科学家及医生之一，入选者当中有两名华人，另一名是治疗爱滋病的专家何大一。
　　
　　

Wise Young（杨咏威）教授官方网页


       


作者：idzhang3　回复日期：2010-10-01　05:35:36　
       



　　Wise Young（杨咏威）教授发布附言的中文译文
　　http://sci.rutgers.edu/forum/sho ... 83&postcount=35
　　
　　我一直很不愿意评论这件事情，因为缺乏足够证据。你们（新语丝自愿者）关于肖医生成功率的所谓“调查”，是由没有评估病情资格的、长期批评肖医生的方先生的律师作出的。通常来说，在科学和医学领域，结果是由另一类调查、由进行类似研究的人员做出，看是否能够复制这个结果。
　　
　　就他的信用而言，肖医生在过去五年，一直非常努力致力于传授他的手术给其他医生，并且鼓励他们去从事并公布解除膀胱麻痹的肖氏手术的临床实验结果。 Peters医生在密歇根奥克兰大学William Beaumont医院进行的第一个临床实验报告，在the Journal of Urology（《泌尿学杂志》）期刊上公布了。据我所知，斯堪的纳维亚半岛（北欧国家）的其他实验结果也会很快公布。肖医生公布了他的研究结果。他的研究报告并不难找到。
　　
　　我鼓励人们研究那些报告，通过自己独立思考而得出结论。我不想把我对这些报告的认识强加于人，直到人们有机会阅读了那些报告，讨论那些结果。现在，我附上国际学术界关于肖医生和关于他被拘禁新闻的一封信。这封信对肖医生表示了强烈支持，并且已经由一些相关领域著名的泌尿学家和科学家签了名。
　　
　　Wise.


       


作者：idzhang3　回复日期：2010-10-01　05:39:33　
       



　　2010年3月，Wise Young（杨咏威）教授对新语丝小组指控肖传国的意见书（译文）
　　
　　第一帖
　　
　　新语丝小组：
　　
　　我建议你们附上你们的真实姓名和学术资格，以支持你们在CareCure论坛提交的控诉信。你们以匿名面目出现，对一个著名医生提出非常严重却缺乏证据的学术不端的指控。这在中国也许是司空见惯的，但在美国却是不能容忍的行为。
　　
　　根据你们帖子里提供的链接，肖传国医生2006年对搜狐爱特信信息技术（北京）有限公司、中国协和医科大学出版社、方是民提起名誉侵权诉讼。你们是诉讼被告方是民（笔名方舟子）那方面的吗？
　　
　　或者你们是代表2006年在抗议武汉市江汉区法院判决方是民向肖医生公开道歉并赔偿的信上签名的“中国知识分子”？
　　
　　谁是“新语丝志愿者”？不管你们是谁，请不要把CareCure卷入你们和肖医生私人间的激烈冲突。如果你们确实有意讨论肖医生方法的价值，和脊髓损伤病人是否能从这种治疗方法中得益，当然非常欢迎你们发帖和参与讨论；如果我们能知道你们到底是谁，你们的可信度会大大增加。
　　
　　本论坛的规则之一是，CareCure成员不能攻击其他成员。你们在这里发出的控诉信是对肖医生的个人攻击。鉴于肖医生是CareCure论坛的一个真正成员，我建议你们以后避免对他的个人攻击。鉴于这封控诉信也在别的地方发出了，我将允许这封信留在这里，但是请将今后讨论局限于手术方法范围之内。
　　
　　在另一个帖子里，我对公开发表的肖医生的科学方法和相关临床研究作了概述。我也描述了我对肖医生在一些学术会议上所作报告的感想。顺便说一句，我第一次听肖医生的报告，是在2005年12月举行的、由ChinaSCINet资助的第一届国际脊髓损伤治疗与临床试验交流会（ISCITT）上。我想 ChinaSCINet应该还会有会议的DVD资料可供购买。
　　
　　Wise.
　　　　
　　第二帖
　　
　　新语丝小组：
　　
　　我对你们不肯说你们是谁感到失望。躲在一个叫新语丝小组这样的名字背后，并说你们是由一些匿名的个人组成的一个小组，你们隐瞒了你们的真实身份。你们质疑他人的诚实，并声称他在手术成功率上撒了谎，但是却不想说你们是谁。我明白你们是害怕受到法律追究；但是正因如此，在批评别人时表明自己真实身份才如此重要。在美国，匿名诽谤是不可接受的，并且严重损害你们的可信度。
　　
　　不管你们是否同意你们的信是对肖医生的个人攻击，请你们今后避免在本论坛攻击他。你们的信的很多部分远超事实证据之外，并显示你们个人对肖医生品格的主观诠释。你们应该明白，对于作为公正评估的依据而言，律师的“调查”并没有高的价值，因为在美国，律师按惯例是站在他的当事人一边，不管事实真相到底是什么样的。如果你们提到所谓“专家”，请指出他们的名字和他们的学术地位。比如，你们说“专家们”不同意肖医生关于膀胱神经支配重建的科学解释。那些人是谁呢？是什么让他们成为专家的？无法确认他们的真名实姓、也不知道他们为什么是专家，使得你们的指控没什么可信度。
　　
　　之所以需要公正的第三方医生的临床试验，是用来确认这个手术方法的安全性和有效率。在一个新的报道里，William Beaumont医院的Kenneth Peters医生相当谨慎地提及他对肖氏手术对病人的有效率的评估，说结果是“混合的”。他指出接受这个治疗的12个手术病人中的三个脊髓损伤病人是“不成功”。你们在你们关于Peters医生研究陈述的描述中，没有提及9个脊柱裂病人中的7个显示“有改善”，其中一个女孩被认为是“home run”并恢复了“完全的自我控制”。这就是说，根据最新的报道，这是一个盲法试验，比较那些只做过拴系松解术的和那些搭建了外围神经桥的病人。非常期望在同行评议的期刊上看到关于这个成果的论文。
　　
　　Wise.
　　　
　　第三帖
　　
　　新语丝小组：
　　
　　我已经要求你们节制对肖氏手术的表述，避免个人攻击。你们说你们害怕遭到私人报复，但同时再次在这个公开论坛展开对肖医生的个人攻击。如果你们真的不理解我所说的个人攻击是指什么：我指的是，你们一再重复指控肖医生不诚实、说他恐吓威胁你们。请一定不要把你们激烈的个人仇恨带到CareCure论坛来。这显然是一种宿怨，一场贬低肖医生名誉的运动。这样的做法在本论坛不受欢迎。我因此把这个帖子设为只供论坛成员阅读。假如你们再发攻击的帖子，我将删除这个帖子，并屏蔽你们。
　　
　　Wise.
　　
英文原帖可参照新语丝博客的存档：http://xysblogs.org/wp-content/blogs/107/uploads/ccfthread.html


  附录：Dr. Wise Young的英文回复原文

   

   No. 1

   xyusergroup,

   I suggest that you append your real name(s) and credentials to the letter of complaint that you just posted on CareCure. You appear to be anonymously making very serious allegations of misconduct against a well-known clinician. While this may be customary in China, this is not acceptable behavior in the United States.

   According to a link in your post, Dr. Xiao Chuan-Guo filed a defamation lawsuit against Sohu Information Technology Inc., the University Press of Peking Union Medical College, and Fang Shi-min in 2006. Are you one of the party that he filed the lawsuit against, i.e. Fang Shi-min (pen-name Fang Zhou-zhi)?

   Or are you representing the \\"intellectuals in China\\" who are listed as signatories of a letter protesting the 2006 judgment by the Jianghan District Court of Wuhan City against the Fang Shi-min, ordering him to apologize publicly and compensate Dr. Xiao?

   Who are the \\"New Threads Volunteers\\"? Whoever you are, please do not involve CareCure in the acrimonious personal exchanges between you and Dr. Xiao. If you are interested in discussing the merits of Dr. Xiao\\'s method and whether or not people with spinal cord injury can benefit from the treatment, you are of course very welcome to post and discuss the method although your credibility would be much enhanced if we knew who you are.

   One of the rules of this site is that members must not attack another member of CareCure. The complaint letter that you have posted is a personal attack of Dr. Xiao. Since Dr. Xiao may very well be a member of CareCure, I suggest that you avoid further personal attacks of him. Since the letter of complaint has been published elsewhere, I will allow the letter to remain on this site but please confine futher discussion to the surgical method.

   In another thread, I had summarized the published works of Dr. Xiao reporting his scientific and clinical findings. I had also described what I have seen at Dr. Xiao\\'s presentations at public symposia. Incidentally, the first presentation that I saw Dr. Xiao make was at the First International Spinal Cord Injury Treatment and Trials Symposium (ISCITT) held in December 2005 and sponsored by ChinaSCINet. I think that ChinaSCINet may have had some DVD\\'s of that symposium for sale and there may be some left.

   Wise.

   

   No. 2

   xyusergroup,

   I am disappointed that you are not admitting to who you are. By hiding behind a name such as xyusergroup and claiming that you are a group of anonymous individuals, you are keeping your identity hidden. You are criticizing another man's integrity and claiming that he is lying about the success rate of his surgical procedure but yet you are unwilling to say who you are. I understand your fear of being sued but that fear is precisely why it is important that people identify themselves when criticizing others. In the United States, anonymous character assassination is not acceptable and seriously detracts from your credibility.

   Regardless of whether you agree your letter is personally attacking Dr. Xiao, I ask you to please refrain from attacks of him in the future on this site. Many parts of your letter go well beyond the facts and represent your personal subjective interpretations concerning Dr. Xiao's integrity. You should understand that "investigations" by lawyers are not highly regarded as sources of unbiased assessments because lawyers are traditionally expected in the United States to take sides in cases, regardless of truth. If you refer to so-called "experts", please identify them by name and credentials. For example, you are saying that certain "experts" disagree with Dr. Xiao's scientific explanations of the mechanisms of bladder reinnervation. Who are they? What makes them experts? The failure to identify them and the source of their authority makes your claims less credible.

   Clinical trials by unbiased third party doctors is what is required to ascertain whether this procedure is safe and effective. In a news report (Source), Dr. Kenneth Peters of the William Beaumont Hospitals was appropriately cautious in his assessment of the efficacy of the Xiao procedure in patients, calling the results "mixed". He pointed out that the treatment was "unsuccessful" in three spinal cord injury patients out of 12 operated patients. What you omitted in your description of that study is Dr. Peters statement that 7 of 9 patients with spina bifida showed "marked improvement", including one girl that was considered a "home run" and recovered "complete continence". Also, according to the news report, the study was a blinded one, i.e. comparing patients who had only untethering and those that had the peripheral nerve bridging. It would be very interesting to see the publication of these results in a peer-reviewed journal.

(Wise Young（杨咏威）: 对新语丝小组指控肖传国公开信的意见书)接上页博讯www.peacehall.com

   Wise.

   

   No. 3

   xyusergroup,

   I have asked you to confine your statements to Dr. Xiao's procedure and to refrain from personal attacks. You say that you are afraid of personal retaliation and yet you are again making personal attacks of Dr. Xiao on this public forum. In case you do not understand what I mean by personal attack, I refer to your repeated claims that Dr. Xiao is dishonest and that he has made threats against you. Please do not bring your acrimonious personal vendetta onto CareCure. It is clearly a vendetta, a campaign to discredit Dr. Xiao. It is not welcome on this site. I am consequently moving this thread into the Members Only Forum. If you make another attack post, I will remove this thread and ban you.

   Wise.

(Wise Young（杨咏威）: 对新语丝小组指控肖传国公开信的意见书 全文完