对浙大院士课题组的论文事件已有众多评论，因为事不关己，只浏览了少数的评论。此前曾目睹过前老板被同事指控在投稿时随意删除或添加作者，因而得知审理这类案件国外机构会引用温哥华议定书（Vancouver Protocol, www.icmje.org）。 议定书明确了要被列为作者以下三条必须全部满足： 1. 对构思和设计，获取数据，或分析解释数据有显著贡献， 2.起草文章或修改文章重要的学术内容， 3.参与定稿。 （Authorship credit should be based on 1） substantial contributions to conception and design, acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data; 2） drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and 3) final approval of the version to be published. Authors should meet conditions 1, 2, and 3.） 议定书并明确指出仅仅参与获取科研资金，或收集数据，或作常规的监管不足以被列为作者。 对照温哥华议定书，显然浙大院士和实验室主任的行为完全越轨了。浙大既然宣称要角逐世界一流，那么就必须要顺应国际惯例。如果浙大尚未有明确的科研守则，何不应尽快参照其他大学的守则写出草案，公示后成为正式文件向师生传达? 处理这起院士课题组的论文事件既棘手而又不讨好，那么为什么不防患于未然？与其给学生开爱国课，倒不如向师生介绍科研伦理，不出丑闻不给中国丢脸，不就是爱国吗？！ 再贴一段澳洲著名免疫学家Gustav Nossal 回忆诺贝尔奖得主Macfarlane Burnet时的讲话：One of the minor regrets, not really a big regret, is that Ive never published a paper with Mac Burnet. Ive published 500 papers, not a single one has Burnet as a co-author. He did not believe in putting his name on a paper if he hadnt done at least one third of the work himself. A sort of an honest unselfish approach, when it comes time to reap the glory you do it without having someone grabbing it instead of you. Macfarlane Burnet只有在自己对文章有三分之一以上贡献时才肯把自己列为作者 --- 这才是真正的大师！
标签: Vancouver
