Anonymous

Strengthening research in China should include political opening? 

250 words

Dear Editor,

I appreciate your encouraging Editorial (March 17, p 880),[1] and welcome China’s will to become a scientific-technological superpower by 2020.[2]

China still without modern-science, evolved as world technological superpower before Europe conquered America. Later, China’s autarchy, aborted reforms, and socialism until 1978, caused socio-economic, political, and scientific-technological stagnation, maintaining starvation and extreme-poverty.[3,4,5]

China has grown socio-economically amazingly with three-decade free-market economy in the southeast coast, and plans modernize its rural northwest with little pollution.[2,4,5]

From 1957 to 2005, China reduced infant mortality seven-fold; increased life expectancy 62%, urbanization 173%, GNI per-capita nine-fold, and physician average-wage an estimate of twenty-fold. China surpassed North Korea, Cuba, and Viet Nam, but stayed behind the four Asian Tigers (table). China could complete quickly the three-century liberalization movement that made the UK and US first scientific-technological superpowers. Chinese could study the United-Nations’ individual rights in the Asian Tigers and G8’s development models.  

Scientific creativity needs entire freedom from ideological walls for critical thought; universal free-research activity in production and service’s centres, as in top research-institutes; and liberated international exchange of simple professionals, physically, and through web- and cutting-edge IT-based research collaboratories.

Research productivity requires liberation of native physicians, agro-industrial engineers, natural-social sciences’ professionals, from the immobilizing egalitarianism (narcotic for the poorest socioeconomic-status stress of the less-qualified workforce and non-workers). Professionals must enjoy better working and living incentives, like political managers and foreigners have by default.

China could become the rural-remote primary-health-and-life-care’s research superpower with the most comprehensive general-family medicine and top IT. Chinese creating comfortable home-conditions could enhance “brain magnetism”.

Sincerely,

I am a Cuban professional

Anon

[email protected]

c/o The Lancet, 32 Jamestown Road, London NW1 7BY, UK

Conflict of Interest: none

References:

1. The Lancet. Reforming research in China. Lancet 2007; 369:880.
Full Text

2. Wilsdom J, Keeley J. China: The next science superpower. Demos. The Atlas of Ideas. 2007. http://www.demos.co.uk/files/China_Final.pdf

3. Kennedy P. The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers. 1st Ed. New York: Vintage Books, 1989.

4. Landes DS. The Wealth and Poverty of Nations: Why Some Are So Rich and Some So Poor? 1st Ed. New York: W.W. Norton Co. & Inc., 1999.

5. Sachs JD. The End of Poverty. Economic Possibilities for Our Time. 1st Ed. New York: The Penguin Press, 2005.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                                                                                                                                     

        

Table:  Comparison of four closed socialist with four opened capitalist developing countries
and the G8 developed countries by human development indexes. Selection 1957, 2005.
Index-Year  /  Countries	Infant mortality (< 1-yr x1000 l.b.)                  [1-3]		Life expectancy at birth (years)                 [2-4]		Urban population (%)      [2-4]		GNI per capita (1990 US$  conv. GK PPP)                        [6]		Inhabitants x physician (ratio)            [2,5]		Physician wage (month US$)             [7]	Professional in R&D (x mill in)    [5]	Mobile-cell (x1000 inh)    [5]	Internet users (x1000 inh)    [5]	Economic liberty (rank)             [8]	Political + civil liberty (rating) [9]
Developing countries	1957	2005	1957	2005	1957	2005	1957	2005	1957	2005	2005	2005	2005	2005	2005	2005
Cuba	32	6	63	78	53	76	2406	2691	999	169	20	537	7	13	156	14
Taiwan	36	6	62	77	30	75	1314	19163	2348	<500	3304	>1500	968	580	26	2
Singapore	41	3	63	79	100	100	2318	24571	2221	714	5263	4745	910	571	2	9
Hong Kong	56	2	65	82	84	95	2825	27709	3050	<500	>3300	1564	1184	506	1	7
North Korea	>85	42	54	64	37	62	1087	1027	>3500	>700	<20	<500	<5	<10	157	14
South Korea	90	5	53	78	27	81	1206	17259	3523	553	2578	3187	761	657	36	3
Viet Nam	>147	19	43	71	14	27	775	2458	22951	1871	50	<500	60	61	138	12
China	>150	23	45	73	15	41	631	5519	8427	609	120	663	258	73	119	13
Developed countries	1957	2005	1957	2005	1957	2005	1957	2005	1957	2005	2005	2005	2005	2005	2005	2005
United Kingdom	24	5	70	79	79	89	8017	22417	1400	601	8194	2706	1021	628	6	2
United States	26	6	70	78	67	81	10920	30519	809	182	14320	4484	617	630	4	2
Canada	31	5	71	80	65	81	8607	24186	958	477	3607	3597	469	626	10	2
France	34	4	70	80	58	77	6890	22240	947	304	>3500	3213	738	414	45	2
Germany (W-E)	39	4	69	79	74	88	5274	19477	724	276	9281	3271	864	500	19	2
Japan	40	3	67	82	39	66	3136	22119	948	496	10208	5287	716	587	18	3
Italy	50	4	69	80	57	68	5118	19252	700	165	4181	1213	1090	501	60	2
Russia (USSR)	57	14	67	65	49	73	3576	7304	562	240	>120	3319	517	101	120	11
Explanatory notes:   red: closed; yellow: former closed; green & blue: opened countries. [< # , # >: personal estimate]
Sources:
1 UN. Demographic Yearbook 1966. New York: UN Publ; 1967.
2 UN. Statistical Yearbook 1959,1960. New York: UN Publ; 1960, 1961.
3 UNICEF. Statistical Tables, 2003, 2007. http://www.unicef.org/sowc07/docs/sowc07_tables.pdf
4 UN. World Population Prospects, 2007. http://esa.un.org/unpp
5 UNDP. Human Development Index Tables, 2007. http://hdr.undp.org/hdr2006/pdfs/report/HDR_2006_Tables.pdf
6 GGDC. Total Economy Database & Madisson Historical Statistics, 2007. http://www.ggdc.net/
7 NBER. Occupational Wages around the World. International Labor Organization, 2007. http://www.nber.org/oww/ (http://laborsta.ilo.org)
8 HF. Indexes of Economic Freedom. WCAS, 2007. http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/countries.cfm
9 FH. Freedom in the World 2006. GSPRCL, 2006. http://www.freedomhouse.org/uploads/pdf/Charts2006.pdf