到2022年，中国会超过美国成为科学和医学研究领域的最大投资者。

原文地址：https://www.reddit.com

原创翻译：龙腾网  翻译：haleyyen

正文翻译：

China could surpass the US and becomethe world's leading investor in scientific and medical research by 2022

到2022年，中国会超过美国成为科学和医学研究领域的最大投资者。

A new study hasclaimed that the US’ status as the world’s leading nation in scientific andmedical research is under threat.

据一项新的研究表明，美国在世界科学和医学研究领域的领先地位正受到威胁。

University ofMichigan researchers reviewed every issue of six top-tier internationaljournals and four mid-tier journals from 2000 to 2015.

密歇根大学的研究人员回顾了2000年到2015年间6个顶级国际期刊和4个中端期刊。

While theresearchers concluded that the US is still the world leader in research anddevelopment spending, and ranks first in the world for scientific discoveries,China’s increased investment in science over the past two decades means that itcan now provide the US with serious competition and ranks fourth in the worldfor total number of new discoveries.

尽管研究人员得出结论,美国现在仍然是世界上研发经费最大的国家, 并且科研发现的数量居世界首位, 但是在过去二十年里中国在科研方面不断增加的投资表明，它现在可以与美国相匹敌，新发现的总量居世界第四。

However, proposedbudget cuts in the US, and the belief that Chinese R&D spending willsurpass the US total by 2022 could mean that China eventually becomes theleading nation for scientific and medical research.

然而，美国提出要削减预算的计划，同时中国则怀有坚定的信念要在2022年研发经费赶超美国，这可能意味着中国终将成为世界科研领域的顶尖国家。

“It’s time for USpolicy makers to reflect and decide whether the year-to-year uncertainty inNational Institutes of Health budget and the proposed cuts are in our societaland national best interest,” said Bishr Omary, M.D., Ph.D. and chief scientificofficer of Michigan Medicine, U-M’s academic medical center.

" 是时候让美国的决策者们反思，关于美国国立卫生研究院( NIH ) 不明的年度预算和减少开支的提议等等，到底如何对我们的国家和社会最有利。" 说话者 Bishr Omary 医学博士是密西根大学医学研究中心的首席科学家。

“If we continue onthe path we’re on, it will be harder to maintain our lead and, even moreimportantly, we could be disenchanting the next generation of bright andpassionate biomedical scientists who see a limited future in pursuing ascientist or physician-investigator career.”

“如果继续这样下去，我们将很难保持当前的领先水平，更重要的是，这会使那些对生物医学有兴趣和热情的年轻人感到前途黯淡，从而放弃自己的科学或医学生涯。”

Rather than beinga dominant force in scientific and medical research, the researchers discoveredthat the US were now more likely than ever to cooperate with other nations onpeer-reviewed papers.

研究人员发现，美国比以往任何时候都更应该就同行评审的论文与其他国家合作，而不是成为科学和医学研究领域的主导力量。

It is thought thatstagnating budgets in the US, Great Britain and other European countries, aswell as Canada and Australia, have ushered in an era of “team science” in thelast 15 years.

人们普遍认为，在过去15年间，美国、英国和其他欧洲国家以及加拿大和澳大利亚的逐渐停滞不前的预算，使我们迎来了一个“团队科学”的时代。

In 2000, 25% ofpapers in the six top-tier journals were by teams that included researchersfrom at least two countries.

在2000年，六大顶尖期刊杂志上25%的论文是由团队完成的，而团队中的研究人员至少来自于两个不同的国家。

However, in 2015that figure was closer to 50%. The increasing need for multidisciplinaryapproaches to make major advances, coupled with the advances of Internet-basedcollaboration tools were likely have something to do with this, Omary said.

但是，在2015年，这个数字近50%。运用多学科方法而实现突破的需求日益增加，还有以互联网为基础的协作工具的发展，都可能与此有关, omary博士表示。

The researchersnoted that while their study was based on data up to 2015, in the current 2017federal fiscal year, National Institutes of Health budget increased thanks tobipartisan Congressional appropriations.

研究人员指出，尽管他们的研究基于2015年之前的数据，但是在当前的2017年联邦财政年度里美国国家卫生研究院的预算增加了，这还要感谢国会两党的拨款。

But the proposedcuts to research funding in the 2018 budget could hinder many areas of researchand negatively impact the next generation of aspiring scientists.

但是，在2018年预算中削减科研经费的提议可能会阻碍许多研究领域的发展，并对有抱负的年轻科学家产生负面影响。

“Our analysis,albeit limited to a small number of representative journals, supports theimportance of financial investment in research,” Omary says.

“尽管数据仅来自少数几个具有代表性的期刊杂志，但是我们的分析证明了金融投资在研究中的重要性，”Omary说。

“I would stillstrongly encourage any child interested in science to pursue their dream andpassion, but I hope that our current and future investment in NIH and otherfederal research support agencies will rise above any branch of government tohelp our next generation reach their potential and dreams.”

“对于那些热爱科学并有意投身其中的孩子们，我还是会强烈支持他们去追逐自己的梦想，但是我希望政府对美国国家卫生研究院和其他联邦研究机构的投入在现在以及未来能得到提高，高于政府的其它分支机构，这样我们的下一代才能充分发挥他们的潜力，实现他们的梦想。”

评论翻译：

That's great news.Now the US can steal China's IP.

真是好消息啊，现在轮到美国偷中国的知识产权了。

Yeah, but where'sthe manufacturing sector to build that stolen IP?

是啊，问题是偷了知识产权能怎么样呢？上哪儿找用得上的制造业呢？

They're also theleading investor in fake research

This shouldterrify the world just as much as excite.

中国人也是造假方面的头号投资者。

这带给世界的惊吓和惊喜是一样的。

Why would anybodybut the Chinese be excited by this news?

为什么我们要对这样的新闻感到兴奋？除了中国人自己

Large improvementsin technology tend to benefit everyone in a global economy.

因为技术的提高对于世界上每个人都是有益的。

Research isn't azero sum game.

科学研究不是零和博弈。

（译者注：零和博弈，与非零和博弈相对，是博弈论的一个概念，属非合作博弈。指参与博弈的各方，在严格竞争下，一方的收益必然意味着另一方的损失，博弈各方的收益和损失相加总和永远为“零”，双方不存在合作的可能。）

The Chinese are arival and adversary, we're competing economically, culturally, financially,geopolitically, etc. Obviously it's bad for us if they pull ahead of us inresearch.

中国是我们的对手，是我们的敌人，我们在经济、文化、金融、地缘政治等方面都存在竞争。显然，如果他们在研究中领先于我们，那我们就很被动了。

So are Americansto me. So what?

对我来所美国人也是对手，也是敌人啊。那又怎样？

Maybe I don't careabout America's god given right to bomb civilians in whatever country they wantin the Middle East. Considering globally America is seen as the world'sgreatest threat to peace, most people don't care about US hegemony and arehappy for research that might give us longer and happier lives.

美国自以为理所当然的有权随意在中东任何国家轰炸平民，我对于此一点都不感兴趣。鉴于美国在全球范围内被视作是和平的最大威胁，所以大部分人才不关心美国的霸主地位，相反为中国科研发展给我们带来的长期快乐的生活而高兴。

Why would anyonenot be excited by this news? The medical research fight is against disease, notagainst other countries. Do you turn down medical treatment or refuse to usetechnology because it was developed by foreigners? I want every country toincrease their medical research. Even military research is often beneficial forthe whole world. The internet, GPS, and satellites were developed by the USdefense department, but now benefit the whole world. I don't want the Chinese(my home country the USA) to get better at murdering people with drones, butthat is such a tiny piece of the research compared to all the good researchdone all over the world.

为什么我们就不会为了这样的新闻而感到高兴？医学研究是用来对抗疾病的，不是对抗其他国家。你会因为某种医疗技术是外国人开发就拒绝医疗或者拒绝使用这种医疗技术吗？我想让每个国家都增加他们对医学研究的投入。即使军事研究很多情况下也对全世界都是有助益的。英特网，GPS，以及卫星都是有美国国防部研发的，但是现在全世界都在受益。我不想让中国人（我的祖国是美国）在用无人机杀人方面的技术得到提升，但是相对于这样研究给世界带来的好处，这只是研究中小的不能再小的一个部分。

Not all medicalresearch is subsidized, it's not just paid for by governments.

And not allresearch business is for profit, rather not-for-profit (different thannon-profit). These companies need other businesses to invest and work together,and this costs money and a lot of time. Companies won't invest if the researchisn't secured and safe then there is no incentive to invest.

Research takesyears, sharing the key knowledge takes 1 e-mail. There is a serious concernabout chinese researchers stealing research that way in EU (NL at least fromwhat I know). If stolen and fake research is so prent in China then Yes Ido have mixed feelings about this news.

并非所有的医学研究都是由政府资助的。

有些研究是为了盈利，而有些研究则不以盈利为主要目的（这与非盈利性是有区别的）。这些公司需要投资其他的企业，与之一起合作，这需要资金和大量的时间。如果研究没有安全保障，也就意味着不能带来投资的动力，那这些公司也不会进行投资。

做研究需要数年的时间，而分享研究的关键性成果则只需要1封电子邮件。人们对于中国研究人员以这样的方式在欧盟窃取研究成果的问题表示严重担忧（至少从我所了解来看）。如果偷来的和伪造的研究在中国如此之盛行，那么是的，我对这样一个消息确实有种复杂的情感。

If they startgetting more funding than researchers in the US and EU, thenmaybe theft of research won't bee such a problem. The issue was always thatthey were catching up from way behind with little funding, and there was (is)intense competition for scarce resources.

如果他们能获得比美国和欧盟的研究人员更多的资金，那么也许就不会有偷窃研究成果这样的问题了。一直以来问题都是他们总用极少的资金来追赶本就领先的美国和欧盟，还有对稀缺资源的激烈竞争。

So your argumentis basically that we should let them pass us so they don't have to steal fromus anymore? Really?

所以你认为，为了让他们不再偷窃我们的成果，就应该让他们超过我们？真的假的？

Lol, you don't getto 'let' them do anything. They're gonna do it with or without your permission,and the world will benefit from it.

You guys are allabout America-first nationalism these days. You can go autofellate in thecorner and let the rest of the world move on without you. You abdicated yourrole as world leader.

笑，你没办法强迫他们做任何事。不管有没有你的同意，他们都将这样做，全世界都会因此受益。

你们这些人哪，天天都在大谈美国第一的民族主义。你尽可以呆在你的小世界里，没了你，地球照样转。世界领袖早已不是你。

Of course we'reletting them do it, or rather the leaders of our country are letting them do itand getting rich in the process. Our businesses built manufacturing plantsthere, they industrialize, they ship it over here and we buy it. Economicsanctions could end all that, China's a paper tiger. The social contract withwhich the Chinese people allow the overtly authoritarian CCP to rule is basedentirely off of the CCP's ability to deliver continued economic prosperity.They've been able to ensure that since the 80's due to American investment, butit could disappear much quicker than it appeared and as soon as they enter arecession it's going to be Tiananmen x10. An absurd amount China's capital isstuck in long term infrastructure projects like the New Silk Road and all oftheir half-empty mega-cities. On top of this, they've got a huge problemwith capital flight, specifically because the Chinese elite know that thecountry's a powder keg ready to blow.

当然是我们允许他们这样做的，更确切地说，在我们国家领导人的允许下，他们才能这样干，同时，在这个过程中，我们国家也会受益，积累财富。我们的企业在哪里建工厂，他们生产，然后在运到美国，让我们消费。经济制裁可以结束一切，中国就是一只纸老虎。中国人民允许CCP来治理国家，这样的社会契约本来建立在CCP给社会提供经济持续繁荣发展的能力之上，但现在他们的这种能力已经不足。在80年代之前，在美国的投资下，他们还是有能力做到这点的。但是，这种能力可能消失的速度比它出现的速度更快。数字大到让人感到荒谬的中国资本陷于诸如诸如新丝绸之路和半空的巨型城市等长期基础设施项目中无法自拔。最重要的是，他们遇到了资本外逃上的这个巨大问题，特别是因为中国的精英们认识到这个国家的火药桶已经要爆炸了。

It's completelylost on me why so many Westerners have this idea in their head that China issome kind of unstoppable economic juggernaut. China's entire economy ispredicated on the hope that Americans will continue to invest in their countryand buy their cheap shit. Cheap labor is overly abundant, they need ourconsumer market but we don't need their labor. Southeast Asia and Latin Americaare quickly becoming cheaper due to Chinese wage hikes, despite their currencyduations.

And lol, you thinkthe world's going to move on without us? We are the world. The UN,IMF, World Bank all exist because we allow them to. They're ways for us toleverage soft power projection. If we cut funding and backed out of any ofthese organizations, they would be drastically less capable and would more thanlikely lose their legitimacy just like the League of Nations. At the end of theday, might makes right and we're by far the mightiest. We could completely haltall development and advancement and we'd still be a major player for decades tocome. We're not going anywhere bud.

我完全不明白为什么这么多西方人认为中国是无法阻挡的经济大国。中国的整个经济都是基于美国，希望美国人继续在他们的国家投资并购买他们廉价的垃圾。廉价劳动力太多太多，他们需要我们的消费市场，但我们不需要他们的劳动力。尽管人民币贬值，但由于中国的工资上涨，东南亚和拉丁美洲正迅速变成投资更少回报更大的投资地。

笑，你以为没了我们地球还会转吗？我们就是世界。联合国、国际货币基金组织、世界银行，这些机构之所以存在是因为我们允许他们存在。它们是我们发展软实力的方式。如果我们削减资金并退出这些组织中的任何一个，他们的能力将会大大降低，而且可能会像国际联盟一样失去其合法性。 也许有一天情况会变化，但到现在为止我们一直是最强大的。我们完全可以阻断所有的发展和进步，在未来的几十年里，我们仍然是一个重要的玩家。我们一直都在这里。

First, the USneeds China's trade as much as China needs America's. It would be an economicdisaster for both countries if the US were to embargo China. And once their NewSilk Road is complete, their dependence on US trade begins to vanish. Yourpicture of China depending entirely on US trade is stuck in the 90s.

Buying shit fromthem wasn't charity; they straight out-competed the US.

首先，在贸易中，美国需要中国，如同中国需要美国一样。如果美国对中国实施禁运，对两国来说都将是一场经济灾难。一旦他们的新丝绸之路完成，他们对美国贸易的依赖就会开始消失。中国经济完全依赖美国贸易的印象你还停留在90年代。

从他们那里买垃圾商品不是慈善; 他们超过了美国。

We are the world.

Yeah, and so wasGreat Britain at one point. The international organizations you mention werecreated by the US, largely for the benefit of the US, and China is already launchingcompetitors. It's in America's interest--but not necessarily China's--for theUS to keep funding those organizations.

You're right thatChina is a bit of a powder-keg, and the rich are happy to keep their moneyabroad. It's not totally clear their experiment will succeed.

对你所说的“我们就是世界”这一说法。

是啊，英国也是一度称霸世界，可现在呢。你提到的国际组织是由美国创建的，很大程度是为了美国的利益，而中国已经是一个逐步上位的竞争对手了。对美国而言，美国继续为这些组织提供资金是符合美国利益的，但不一定符合中国利益。

还有，你说得对，中国有点像个火药桶，富人很乐意把钱放在国外。他们的尝试能否成功还不知道呢。

The US does notneed China's trade. What China brings to the table is cheap labor and that isvery easily replaced. Southeast Asia and Latin America are already beginning tooutcompete China in that regard. But what the US has is not replaceable. The USalone is <25% of the world's consumer market. China's entire economy isbuilt around exporting to that market, were the US to embargo China it wouldnot be able to replace what it lost. Sure, the immediate short term effectswould be recession for both sides, but in the long term the US could easilyreplace China with the aforementioned regions. There's no way to replaceAmerican consumerism, at least not in any reasonable amount of time that couldhelp China avoid existential disaster.

美国不需要与中国有贸易往来。中国能端上台面的只是廉价劳动力，这很容易被取代。在这方面，东南亚和拉美已经开始超越中国。但美国是不可替代的。仅美国一国就占有不到25%的全球消费市场。中国的整个经济都是建立在向美国市场出口的基础上，如果美国对中国实施禁运，它的损失将会是无可取代的。当然，短期来看，对双方来说都会有经济衰退现象，但从长远来看，对美国来说，上述地区很容易可以取代中国。而想要找到美国这样的消费市场是不可能的，至少在合理的时间段内，那没有办法取代美国的消费主义，至少在任何合理的时间内，其他消费市场都无法帮助中国摆脱生存灾难。

And I'm glad youbrought up the AIIB, because it highlights the point I was making aboutlegitimacy. When the US creates an organization like the World Bank, it isn'tjust any financial institution that loans to countries, it is the financialinstitution that loans to countries. If you're not in the World Bank, you'reeither a microstate like Andorra or you're a pariah like North Korea. AIIBdoesn't have any guise of obxtivity and global supremacy, it's just anotherarm of the Chinese government.

我很高兴你提到了亚投行，因为它强调了我对合法性的看法。当美国创建像世界银行这样的组织时，它不仅仅是向国家提供贷款的金融机构。如果你没有加入世界银行，你要么是像安道尔这样的微型国家，要么是像朝鲜一样的贱民国家。亚投行不具有任何的客观性，也没有全球霸权的地位，它只是中国政府的另一个分支机构。

I'm European andI'm excited about this. Why would I not be? Just because Americans aren'texcited about this doesn't mean the rest of the world isn't.

我是欧洲人，我对此感到很兴奋。为什么呢？就因为美国人不愿看到这样的事情发生，所以全世界就都要为此而不高兴吗！！

Canadian here andim excited. Silly US citizen...

加拿大人，我对此很高兴。傻逼美国人。。。

German here, I'mnot excited about it. I don't like the idea of China being hegemon.

德国人，我对这个消息并不感到高兴，我不希望看到中国称霸的局面。

Does it reallymatter from which country innovation comes from? Isn't competition always good?

革新来自于哪个国家真的那么重要吗？有竞争不是更好吗？

Depends on how thepower is wielded. That's the general answer to your general question.

If the scientificresearch and medical research is used mostly for military gains and the plan isto use a majority of that research to kill instead of help, then I can see itbeing bad. This is the glass half empty viewpoint in contrast to your half fullview.

I'm not sayingChina will do this, just that the vague information we are given is open ended.

取决于权力如何运用。这是针对你的一般性问题的一般性回答。

如果科学研究和医学研究主要用于军事利益，计划利用大部分的研究去杀戮而不是提供帮助，那么我认为它是有害的。和你的乐观不同，以上是一个悲观看法。

我不是说中国一定会这样做，只是说跟据我们现有的模糊的信息，可以得出无限多的可能性。

The fakeresearch part

Like the ones thatthe sugar industry in the US bought in the 60's?

研究作假问题

比如说，美国制糖业在60年代花钱买的作假研究。

（译者注：一个称为糖业研究基金（Sugar Research Foundation）的商业集团，也就是今天的糖业协会的前身，在1967年花大价钱聘请三位哈佛大学的科学家发表一篇关于糖类、脂肪和心血管疾病研究的评论文章评论中引用的研究都是经过糖业集团特意挑选的结果，整篇文章极力弱化糖类与心血管疾病之间的关联，并极力将“屎盆子”扣向饱和脂肪酸。http://dy.163.com/v2/article/T1460535614076/C0VBBK7B05119734）

That doesn'tjustify other people doing it?

这不能证明其他人也研究作假？

It totallydoesn't, but why the concern with the research in China and not with theresearch in the US, EU or other parts of the world?

确实不能证明，但是为什么唯独担心中国研究造假，却不担心美国、欧洲以及其他国家研究造假呢？

I agree thatpeople do voice concern about fake research, but here it seems to me that theconcern is only because it's from China. I might totally be wrong though

对于研究造假，我赞同人们应该发出自己的声音，但是对我来说，似乎这种担忧的原因仅仅是因为研究来自于中国。可能也是我错了。

The thing is thatChina does not want to be the world's factory and importing pollution andexporting the fruits of cheap labor. Industrialization is only a step towardsmodern, consumer based economy. Sooner or later, they will and their owncitizens will demand the same safety regulations, environmental protection actsand minimum wages. Who wants their children to work in factories underhorrible conditions and get paid pittance. Everything they are doing is playingcatch up. Once they are done, they will export that shit to other countries.

问题是中国不想成为世界工厂，也不想进口污染物，更不想仅仅局限于出口廉价劳动力的产品。产业化只是塑造现代的消费型经济的一个途径。迟早，他们自己会，他们本国的国民也会对安全法规，环境保护法案，最低工资水平提出同样的要求。谁想要他们的孩子在环境恶劣、工资又少的工厂里工作。他们现在所做的每一件事都是在迎头赶上。一旦他们追上了，他们就会把“垃圾”出口到其他国家。

Edit: seem like alot of people do not really understand China as the usual trope keep popping uplike how China is a communist country, how the people have no say and powerbecause it is not a democracy, as though the Chinese are just a bunch of stupidpeople who followed their leaders blindly. Most people here have utterly no senseof history, especially Chinese history. TBH, I do not condone the CCP or accepthow the Chinese think and behave on the international arena. But fair is fairand people should know what they are talking about before they start openingtheir mouth.

补充：似乎很多人并不真正理解中国，因为很多这样常见的标题层出不群，比如，中国是怎样一个国家，由于没有民主中国人民是多么没有发言权，好像中国人就是一群盲目追随领导人的傻子。这里大多数人完全没有历史感，尤其是中国历史。老实说，我不会接受中国人的观点以及中国人在国际舞台上的所做作为。但是，愿望终归是愿望，而且人在开口之前应该先想好自己到底在说什么。

The Chinese areculturally tended towards commonality and conformism simply because the longsorry history of China demanded a certain amount of shared suffering that bindsextended family and even society together. This is something people in theWest, especially Americans can never fully understand.

中国人在文化上倾向于共同性和因循守旧，只是因为中国长期以来的受压迫的历史需要人们共同分担痛苦，这样共同的痛苦将大家庭、甚至社会联系在一起。这是西方人，尤其是美国人永远无法完全理解的东西。