Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, January 23, 2018

For the first time, China has overtaken the US in terms of the volume of total scientific papers published -- a telling statistic that underscores the rapid strides in scientific achievement China has made on the world stage in recent decades. Among the many statistics reported, China's eclipse of US research output may be of the most concern to those in the American scientific community. In 2016, China published over 426,000 scientific studies indexed by Elsevier's Scopus database -- accounting for about 18.6 percent of the international total. For the first time, the US came in second, notching up 409,000 published papers.

Advertisement

Advertisement

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

US output still outranks China when it comes to scoring citations from scientific papers -- although neither nation is a global leader on that front.

Sweden and Switzerland produce the most highly cited publications, followed by the US, the EU, and then China.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

And we just keep cutting educational and scientific funding. I'm sure this will be fantastic for our economy later on. Stupid Conservatives want to make us a third world country and move us back to manufacturing as the primary economic engine.

#1 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-01-23 11:47 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Make America Stupid Again.

#2 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-23 11:59 AM | Reply

Adjusted for inflation, total R&D spending climbed from 40 billion to 60 billion from '95 to '02, and has stayed in the 60-70 billion range through 2014. The biggest 1-year decline is '09 to '10 after that one-time ARRA cash injection, and has slowly trended back up towards 70 billion since.

en.wikipedia.org

Republicans actually have to pass a budget to cut something, and they do not seem competent enough to get that done.

#3 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2018-01-23 12:00 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Ok, so far we have heard that Conservatives want to make us a third world country and we have heard that R&D research spending has remained stagnant in the 2010 decade.

We can infer from this that one person is completely ignoring reality because all the evidence shows that a certain political group wants us to allow everyone from third world countries to come in to our country, and the other political group hasn't cut funding. Yep, very easy to see here who actually thinks with their brain and who thinks with whatever the Dems tell them to.

#4 | Posted by humtake at 2018-01-23 12:08 PM | Reply | Funny: 2 | Newsworthy 2

Adjusted for inflation, total R&D spending climbed from 40 billion to 60 billion from '95 to '02, and has stayed in the 60-70 billion range through 2014. The biggest 1-year decline is '09 to '10 after that one-time ARRA cash injection, and has slowly trended back up towards 70 billion since.
en.wikipedia.org
Republicans actually have to pass a budget to cut something, and they do not seem competent enough to get that done.

#3 | POSTED BY SITZKRIEG

Republicans have been forcing education cuts for decades at the state and federal level. Stop ignoring basic facts.

#5 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-01-23 12:08 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The stagnation in funding doesn't really show how those dollars are underfunding American Science. This is for a few reasons:
1. The cost of doing things goes up over time due to basic inflation and the costs of doing modern science.
2. The research dollars are being spent by fewer labs doing bigger projects. This is necessary to make progress, but it means less projects are done and less people are thinking about the problems we need to solve in this country.

I can tell you that right now, funding levels for proposals put in to the NIH (the biggest funder of biomedical research) are about 1/10 at the best of times. Reviewers say that 5/10 of the projects should be done. The current wisdom is that we should be telling our trainees to just stop thinking about a career where you will work toward curing illness or solve the basic mechanisms of nature so that others can use your findings to create cures. We tell them to think about how a company might use their skills. This is simply not how discovery works. We're missing out and the numbers are showing that.

A nefarious leech on our system is the lack of career continuity. With such low levels of funding, it is not likely that groups can keep operating over the course of a career. So we have people train and discover something new. Then we fire them due to lack of funding. That expertise is lost forever. Others see that and decide it's foolish to even think about dedicating themselves to solving an outstanding problem in science.

#6 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2018-01-23 12:18 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Republicans have been forcing education cuts for decades at the state and federal level. Stop ignoring basic facts.

#5 | POSTED BY SYCOPHANT AT 2018-01-23 12:08 PM | FLAG:

Total spending on education, including state & federal, is at the highest level it has ever been adjusted for inflation.

www2.ed.gov. In the $536 billion in '05. It's now well over $630 billion as of 2015.

#7 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2018-01-23 12:19 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

Manufacturing supports Research & Development, an expensive exercise in fumbling in the dark. Edison tested thousands of filaments, which are now commonplace.

#8 | Posted by bayviking at 2018-01-23 12:43 PM | Reply

#7 now you're bringing in a few issues.

I would ask where the money is going. Are we paying teachers? Investing in kids?

#9 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2018-01-23 12:49 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#9

And how does per pupil funding compare.

#10 | Posted by TaoWarrior at 2018-01-23 01:00 PM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

I would ask where the money is going. Are we paying teachers? Investing in kids?

#9 | POSTED BY BRUCEBANNER AT 2018-01-23 12:49 PM | FLAG:

Here they used a billion dollar referendum to force through construction of a football palace. It's not a federal or state issue though, that's a local one where the developer the school district uses bankrolls the school board elections.

#11 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2018-01-23 01:12 PM | Reply

And how does per pupil funding compare.

#10 | POSTED BY TAOWARRIOR AT 2018-01-23 01:00 PM | FLAG:

Up 145% total spending, adjusted for inflation, since 1970.

We spend more, much more. Test score are flat. So far there is no evidence you can't buy results.

#12 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2018-01-23 01:14 PM | Reply

rather, that you could buy results.

#13 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2018-01-23 01:14 PM | Reply

Republicans have been forcing education cuts for decades at the state and federal level. Stop ignoring basic facts.
#5 | POSTED BY SYCOPHANT AT 2018-01-23 12:08 PM | FLAG:
Total spending on education, including state & federal, is at the highest level it has ever been adjusted for inflation.
www2.ed.gov. In the $536 billion in '05. It's now well over $630 billion as of 2015.

#7 | POSTED BY SITZKRIEG

That's great. But that's K-12... Not universities and colleges which have seen massive price spikes due to the educational spending cuts.

Unless you want to tell me high schoolers are leading the technological revolution?

#14 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-01-23 01:16 PM | Reply

Up 145% total spending, adjusted for inflation, since 1970.
We spend more, much more. Test score are flat. So far there is no evidence you can't buy results.

#12 | POSTED BY SITZKRIEG AT 2018-01-23 01:14 PM |

population up 157% since 1970

We cut spending

#15 | Posted by hatter5183 at 2018-01-23 01:43 PM | Reply

Not universities and colleges which have seen massive price spikes due to the educational spending cuts.

#14 | POSTED BY SYCOPHANT AT 2018-01-23 01:16 PM | FLAG:

Strike three.

Federal spending is up. State spending is down. Much more importantly, federal lending for college, calculated separately, is up 500% since 1990 (again, adjusted for inflation). The increase in tuition kicked in to gear, you guessed it, 1990. The tuition increase trends up directly along with the secured loan availability. Trending up with both of those, starting at the same time, is the student's owed shared of the tuition. Total enrollment went up 30% with the funding, but average debt on graduation per borrower went up 325%.

Those are just the facts. You can pull them up on Pew, .gov sites, etc. Actual interpretations for solutions vary from a right wing no-loans-ever stance, to a left wing, college is mandatory and paid for by society. A rather moderate stance might be mandatory transparent budgets, curriculum reform, and limited funding for degrees that slave students to significant long-term debt.

#16 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2018-01-23 01:51 PM | Reply

"Those are just the facts."

They are not actually directly relevant to the topic of American research productivity. It's close, but not really.

#17 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2018-01-23 02:14 PM | Reply

Brucebanner (non snippy question) Ok, so China published more papers... but correct me if I'm wrong.... That really means anything, just more papers written, correct? Just because they did research does not mean it was good research, correct? Or am I completely wrong and the fact it was published means it was good research???????

#18 | Posted by PinkyanTheBrain at 2018-01-23 02:18 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

*does not mean anything

#19 | Posted by PinkyanTheBrain at 2018-01-23 02:20 PM | Reply

"Total spending on education, including state & federal, is at the highest level it has ever been adjusted for inflation."

Probably not, when adjusted for education inflation, which is much greater than CPI.

It's probably withering on the vine. But that's not really a surprise since the anti-science GOP holds the purse strings.

#20 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-23 02:21 PM | Reply

They are not actually directly relevant to the topic of American research productivity. It's close, but not really.

#17 | POSTED BY BRUCEBANNER AT 2018-01-23 02:14 PM | REPLY

Feel free to explain that to Sycophant. I'm just obliging on the stats behind the thoughts that's it's cuts making us suffer.

Obama wanted fed R&D spending at 3% GDP, but ended up with 2.81%. 55% of the total spending goes to defense R&D.

China doesn't spend as much, but it's a far larger % of their GDP. Maybe we should ask how they're doing more, with less.

#21 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2018-01-23 02:27 PM | Reply

- Maybe we should ask how they're doing more, with less.

Mao's theory of quality over quantity... at least that's what Pinky tells all the girls.

#22 | Posted by Corky at 2018-01-23 02:29 PM | Reply

Federal lending is not federal spending.

The tuition increase is nonexistant.

Actual total tuition at state universtities has risen at below inflation rates. What has changed is who pays. In 1985 when I was a student at UW Madison I paid $573/semester. The State kicked in over $3,000 and other sources of income (fed grants, alumni donations, activity income)for the university covered another $800. Total cost of education was $4373/semester. Today tuition is $5,263/ semester. The state now only kicks in $2200 and other sources of income cover about $1300. Total cost of education is about $8763/semester. That is a 100% rise in 32 years. If it rose at the rate of inflation total cost would be $10,189

In 1985 the student was responsible for 13% of the education cost. The state paid 68%. Now the student is responsible for 60% and the State only covers 25%.

This has played out nationwide. The states that have made the deepest cuts have also seen the largest tuition increases.

Education used to be viewed as a good investment. Now the GOP views it solely as a cost to be minimized and then complain that they can't find qualified workers

#23 | Posted by hatter5183 at 2018-01-23 02:35 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#22 If you make them holler and want more(give a good quality servicing), the quantity, takes care of itself and creates demand ;)....... Not that you would know that Cork, seeing as you have a quality issue.

#24 | Posted by PinkyanTheBrain at 2018-01-23 02:42 PM | Reply

Brucebanner (non snippy question) Ok, so China published more papers... but correct me if I'm wrong.... That really means anything, just more papers written, correct? Just because they did research does not mean it was good research, correct? Or am I completely wrong and the fact it was published means it was good research???????

#18 | POSTED BY PINKYANTHEBRAIN AT 2018-01-23 02:18 PM | FLAG:

*does not mean anything

#19 | POSTED BY PINKYANTHEBRAIN AT 2018-01-23 02:20 PM | FLAG:


This is a very good question!

You are right. We need to take into account the quality of the papers. The thing is, they are producing very very good papers. When I look at some of the Chinese Departments, they are filled with extraordinary people doing amazing work, being published in the best journals.

They mention in the article that you can start to measure innovation coming from productivity by measuring other things. China is very close to us but we are not at the top. Other countries are doing better. The thing is, when you have so many people involved in producing science, there are more chances that one of them will have the training and ideas to make an innovation.

What are American innovations these days? How to sell more advertising? How to make a cell phone?

#25 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2018-01-23 03:00 PM | Reply

#25 Thanks for the insight Bruce.... Btw how did everything with your paper turn out or is it still in process?

#26 | Posted by PinkyanTheBrain at 2018-01-23 03:06 PM | Reply

Federal lending is not federal spending.

#23 | POSTED BY HATTER5183 AT 2018-01-23 02:35 PM | REPLY

All of that was noted, and when it started trending up is the explosion of loan availability in the early 90s. Per the CBO, the federal loan program will have lost $170 billion by 2027. I don't know what to call that other than federal spending. You're busy playing partisan politics, and China is getting more results for 20% less direct R&D spending.

#27 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2018-01-23 03:08 PM | Reply

#26 still ongoing. optimistic about getting it into something soon. thank you for asking.

#28 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2018-01-23 03:16 PM | Reply

All of that was noted, and when it started trending up is the explosion of loan availability in the early 90s. Per the CBO, the federal loan program will have lost $170 billion by 2027. I don't know what to call that other than federal spending. You're busy playing partisan politics, and China is getting more results for 20% less direct R&D spending.

#27 | POSTED BY SITZKRIEG AT 2018-01-23 03:08 PM

If the states had not shifted the burden to students they wouldn't need to take out the big loans. The loans did not lead to tuition increase. They were merely the response to the cost SHIFT.

Tuition has not risen. It has merely shifted from state responsibility to student responsibility

#29 | Posted by hatter5183 at 2018-01-23 03:26 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 2

#23 | Posted by hatter5183

So what you are saying is government spending has dropped overall and the fact that there have been year after year of double digit rate hikes passed on to students (and their parents) means the cost of education to a student hasn't gone up faster than inflation? To the people seeking an education that is completely BS.

You can't say that Federal and State spending hasn't shrunk when there has been cut after cut (I know humtake posted that). I know that is the case in Michigan for sure and my understanding is it has been the nationwide trend. The state has continually cut education spending at the university level for decades.

I get you are saying that there is simply a shift of the burden but in the real world that means massive cost hikes well beyond inflation to consumers. I know the cost to a student at my university is up about 400% since the mid-90s. That is well beyond inflation.

#30 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2018-01-23 03:50 PM | Reply

So what you are saying is government spending has dropped overall and the fact that there have been year after year of double digit rate hikes passed on to students (and their parents) means the cost of education to a student hasn't gone up faster than inflation? To the people seeking an education that is completely BS.
You can't say that Federal and State spending hasn't shrunk when there has been cut after cut (I know humtake posted that). I know that is the case in Michigan for sure and my understanding is it has been the nationwide trend. The state has continually cut education spending at the university level for decades.
I get you are saying that there is simply a shift of the burden but in the real world that means massive cost hikes well beyond inflation to consumers. I know the cost to a student at my university is up about 400% since the mid-90s. That is well beyond inflation.

#30 | POSTED BY GALAXIEPETE AT 2018-01-23 03:50 PM

No I am not saying the cost to a student hasn't risen. Exactly the opposite. I said TOTAL TUITION has risen slower than inflation. The change is that now we expect students to shoulder the burden which is ridiculous. The right claims that government loan availability caused the rise in student costs. It had nothing to do with it. The rise in student loans is just a natural response to demanding poor students pay more. government education spending cuts are the cause to the tuition increases for students.

#31 | Posted by hatter5183 at 2018-01-23 03:59 PM | Reply

"complain that they can't find qualified workers"

Companies don't want to train employees. Job postings are ridiculously specific.

#32 | Posted by dibblda at 2018-01-23 08:47 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Republicans actually have to pass a budget to cut something

How many budgets did Obama pass?

#33 | Posted by boaz at 2018-01-24 08:11 AM | Reply

Tuition has not risen. It has merely shifted from state responsibility to student responsibility

#29 | POSTED BY HATTER5183 AT 2018-01-23 03:26 PM | FLAG:

"The average annual increase in college tuition from 1980-2014 grew by nearly 260% compared to the nearly 120% increase in all consumer items. In 1980, the average cost of tuition, room and board, and fees at a four-year post-secondary institution was $9,438, according to the Department of Education."

"Dollar amounts in these charts have not been adjusted for inflation. However, tuition and fees at four-year National Universities are significantly outpacing inflation. The total consumer price index inflation increased by 52.7 percent from August 1997 to August 2017, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics."

"According to Bloomberg, college tuition and fees have increased 1,120 percent since records began in 1978. Using this chart to explain its findings, Bloomberg reports that the rate of increase in college costs has been "four times faster than the increase in the consumer price index."

Credible sources say you are wildly wrong. Tuition is up, it has increased faster than inflation, and as noted earlier the trends all begin with the explosion of federally secured loan availability in a program losing $17 billion per year for the next decade using the exact same fair-value accounting that shows up Obamacare is a cost effective solution.

#34 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2018-01-24 11:45 AM | Reply

Well, you're not wildly wrong. Students are picking up a bigger share of the costs as I noted earlier. You are simply completely wrong about the tuition increases.

#35 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2018-01-24 11:47 AM | Reply

pardon the long post.

On the one hand, this is misleading. I have many friends in China in various fields, and have traveled there many times. I have seen a lot of technical, historical, and artistic papers that were noting but regurgitation, plagiarism, filler, or combinations of all three. There isn't a consistent peer review going on there. There IS a "rush to publish" and get one's name on a paper. China is full of misleading, cheating, bribery, deception at every level of government and even college students and faculty join in.

On the other hand, there college students and high school students are KILLING us with ability and training. They actually study--and hard--from an early age. They go to school over a month longer each year than we do. At every major subject, their kids are about two years ahead of ours by the time they take the 高考(gao kao), the entrance test into college. A graduate of QingHua University in Beijing with great English skill is absolutely gonna get accepted into MIT, Cal State, etc. and whiz through.

IMHO, we desperately need two things to deal with this:
1. We MUST reform our educational system to go to school 10 months instead of nine. Most states are still on the 180-day school year like we were in the 1950s. We should adopt a 200 day INSTRUCTIONAL model, with extra days for teacher training. State tests should be done on the weekends ONLY.
2. Start an international peer review panel in all major fields to keep up with China's paper output and judge the merits or weaknesses therein. We do this in the western world but it doesn't keep up with the output of China/Japan/Koerea. We will have to include at least one citizen or language expert from east Asia on any major publication review panel.

#36 | Posted by e1g1 at 2018-01-24 03:31 PM | Reply

#36 | POSTED BY E1G1

Won't happen. Don't want to pay teachers appropriately. We can't admit our kids are dumb. And teachers and education is evil, remember?

If you forgot any of these things, check out Wisconsin and Kansas.

#37 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-01-24 03:40 PM | Reply

#37 it's more systemic than that.

I know somebody works for a state education department training teachers on stage regulations and helping to get school that are not compliant up to speed.

The job kills her sometimes because teachers will refuse to change despite the fact that their kids are failing. They'll walk out of training at 3:00 on the dot because that's what the union contract says and heaven forbid the kid's welfare take precedence over them getting to yoga on time. They'll make good money (teachers where she works are very well compensated) but complain about extra days or effort despite their salaries only requiring they work 9 months a year.

She tells me stories that make my head hurt they're so bad or pathetic.

#38 | Posted by jpw at 2018-01-24 05:25 PM | Reply

Brucebanner, which university are you at if you don't mind me asking?

#39 | Posted by dibblda at 2018-01-25 12:40 AM | Reply

"They'll walk out of training at 3:00 on the dot because that's what the union contract says and heaven forbid the kid's welfare take precedence over them getting to yoga on time."

The other side of this coin is grading homework on your own time every night, while getting paid the same as the PE or Art teacher who never grades homework.

#40 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-25 12:56 AM | Reply

"They'll walk out of training at 3:00 on the dot because that's what the union contract says"

If the administrators want the contract to say something other than 3:00...

a) why didn't they put that in the contract?
b) why did they sign a contract in which they agreed to 3pm?

Exactly how many hours past the agreed time should they stay?

#41 | Posted by Danforth at 2018-01-25 01:04 AM | Reply

"Exactly how many hours past the agreed time should they stay?"

Long enough for JPW's heart to bleed for them, which is going to be tough after it's been bleeding for the children for what, an hour?

#42 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-25 01:39 AM | Reply

"Exactly how many hours past the agreed time should they stay?"

The other question is why doesn't the trainer get the course finished on time?

#43 | Posted by REDIAL at 2018-01-25 07:09 AM | Reply

#40 oh no. Their 10 month a year job doesn't always fall into a neat 8-4 day? The poor dears.

#42 LOL I hope that as one of the biggest SJW asshats on the DR you were attempting to be ironical. Otherwise, your lack of self-awareness is hilarious.

#44 | Posted by jpw at 2018-01-25 10:59 AM | Reply

#41 it's not the specific time but the union backed insistence on nothing going past that time, whether it be 3:00 or 4:00.

As for your question, it wouldn't be long over (see below), 30-60 minutes tops depending on how many questions are asked.

#45 | Posted by jpw at 2018-01-25 11:01 AM | Reply

#43 they're time constrained by mandatory lunch and end of the day. Plus, they're presentation/discussion formats where the audience is encouraged to ask questions to ensure understanding of the material.

A lot of questions = over time.

#46 | Posted by jpw at 2018-01-25 11:02 AM | Reply

"LOL I hope that as one of the biggest SJW asshats on the DR you were attempting to be ironical."

The feeling is mutual.

How many unpaid hours are you putting in today? Maybe you shoulda been a teacher!

#47 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-25 11:33 AM | Reply

"#40 oh no. Their 10 month a year job doesn't always fall into a neat 8-4 day? The poor dears."

They don't write the schedule.

So now you want them to ignore the schedule.

Is that okay when they want to work less, or only when you think they should work more?

#48 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-25 11:36 AM | Reply

#47 you think I'm a crazy SJW? That doesn't make any sense.

And I'm salaried, as are teachers, so I don't put in "unpaid hours".

#48 as a professional you work to get your job done. If you want to punch a clock, find a different profession, especially when the consequences of your attitude are poorly educated children.

#49 | Posted by jpw at 2018-01-25 12:17 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2018 World Readable

Drudge Retort