不能在等待中被“蚕食”殆尽，是非对错就让历史来客观公正地回答……
2004年春，我请人将论文翻译为英文，第一次尝试在网上投给世界著名的美国《Stem Cells》杂志，居然意外地进入同行评审，这与一些国内中医杂志的做法形成天壤之别。第一次评审没能通过，我“以自已的英文水平”写信给主编Curt I. Civin, MD，指出评审者没有理解中医的整体观，反映在干细胞巢中即为成体干细胞的种类是动态的，不仅仅是一种，不仅仅是局域性的，等等。极可能是我第二次改写的论文，根本不符合Curt I. Civin, MD给出的格式要求等，最后Curt I. Civin, MD建议我改投其他专业性杂志。第二、三、四次，我分别投给世界著名的《自然》、《科学》和《细胞》，都没能进入同行评审，建议改投他刊。
此时已经是04年末，我决定放弃上述努力，毕竟中西方文化的差异等太大了，毕竟我内心深处仍然希望是中国人最先重视（穴位与干细胞巢）和取得重大的实验突破，再次改写后，投给现在的《中国组织工程研究与临床康复》，要求必须是干细胞专刊，并且以全英文发表（国外必须能检索到），于是在06年21期（6月）上发表（见博文）。
附件：
Dear Dr. zhang:
Your manuscript entitled, "A Theoretical Research On the Distribution and Classification of Stem Cell Niche," has been carefully reviewed by two experts in the field and by our Editorial Board. Unfortunately, our final decision is that your paper is not acceptable for publication in Stem Cells. Please note that this potential "Young Turks" piece was reviewed by a very senior scientist who is sympathetic to inspirational thinking and new ideas. But even this reviewer felt that the manuscript was too speculative and ungrounded to be ublished in Stem Cells.
You will appreciate that Stem Cells can only accept those manuscripts that receive a high priority rating based on the originality and novelty of the data.
We regret the negative decision on this manuscript, but thank you for sending it to Stem Cells for consideration.
Sincerely,
Curt I. Civin, M.D.
Editor-in-Chief
Stem Cells
***************************************************************
Dear Dr. Zhang Jian-xian,
Thank you for writing and translating your thoughtful letter. In the end, I must stand by my reviewers, who feel that STEM CELLS is not the journal for this sort of philosophical work.
My only additional thought is that you might write a totally different article, in the form of an opinion piece, for our STEM CELLS Young Turks category of manuscripts. I will ask Ann Murphy to send you the guidelines of the Young Turks pieces, as well as editorials about them and some samples of Young Turks pieces. These can be speculative, rather than factual.
Best of luck, Curt
Curt I. Civin, MD
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 20:37:53 +0800 (CST)
Subject: Manuscript decision from Stem Cells
**************************************************************
Dear Dr. zhang:
Your manuscript entitled, "An Unverified Meridian Theory of Traditional Chinese Medicine That May Reveal the Distribution and Classification of Human Stem Cell," has been carefully
reviewed by two experts in the field and by our Editorial Board. Unfortunately, our final decision is that your paper is not acceptable for publication in Stem Cells. We hope that the enclosed reviewer critique will be helpful to you in considering further investigations.
You will appreciate that Stem Cells can only accept those manuscripts that receive a high priority rating based on the originality and novelty of the data. Please know that in this
special situation, we asked for the help of renowned Chinese colleagues; they agreed on the need for more practical evidence for the proposed theories about stem cells.
We regret the negative decision on this manuscript, but thank you for sending it to Stem Cells for consideration.
Sincerely,
Curt I. Civin, M.D.
Editor-in-Chief
Stem Cells
***************************************************************
Lead Reviewer Suggestions to Author (if any):
This work lacks results which confirm- not even in an approximate way-the theories held by the author. The supposed evidence proposed, theorical and hypothetical, is confusing and
uncomprehensible for those who do not know the basis of Tradional Chinese Medicine and unacceptable for those who do know it. Without passing any judgement on the value of Tradional Chinese Medicine, the paper should be considered out of scope and lacking in scientific value to be published in the Journal of Stem Cells and therefore should be rejected.
Reviewers' Suggestions to Author
Reviewer 1 Comments:
Comments to the first manuscript:
General:
The hypothesis raised by the author is supported by the author乫s previous hypothesis, without any scientific evidences.It causes confusion for readers without a basal knowledge of stem cell and traditional Chinese medicine.
Special
1. The author says: For a long period of time, scientists abroad and at home could not 乬discover乭 the material base of the meridian system of the Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) with anatomy or some other methods. Correspondingly, they believed that stem cell could only be confined in the hemopoietic system.
This statement is opposite to the author's later statement that" In 1980乫s, Professor Zhu Zongxiang in China detected the circulation lines that fourteen channels of human body reflect on the skin by using three biophysical methods, which is surprisingly consist with the only coppery body model of acupuncture meridian made in Song Dynasty of China". In fact,
the theory of traditional Chinese medicine is a rather complicated, obscured and abstract one, although it is based on the signs and symptoms of the diseases. So any attempt that
tries to equal the Qi, or Meridian system to a material part of the body is impossible and inadequate. Many Chinese researchers have tried to explain the Chinese medicine theories by the ways of modern Western medicine, both cellularly and anatomically.Some successes or "discoveries" have been achieved and well recognized, but none can explain all theories in Chinese medicine with a single model.Also we cannot find reports that they believed that stem cell could only be confined in the hemopoietic system.
2. The classification of channels and collaterals in the Yellow Emperor乫s Internal Classic is corresponding to that of the adult stem cell.This is not supported by any experiments, even the reference 2,3 are papers of the author's similar hypothesis. Fibroblasts exist in most parts of the bodies, not restricted to the hands and feet, or Dai Channel,
3. Chong Channel is the channel cluster of the two major types of hemopoietic stem cell. The seven levels of the specific immune system are the following:The two major types of HSC mean what? No body has classified the immune system into seven levels. Similarly, arbitrary classification of other tissues (organs) into seven levels is inconvincible.
4.The cell communication by cell fusion occurs universally between embryonic stem cells and adult stem cells, between different types of adult stem cells themselves and between different types of adult stem cells and the subdivided cells.The cell communication by cell fusion also lacks evidence and seems impossible. The reference cited is also a similar
hypothesis of the author.
5. It is reasonable to hypothesize that there should be seven types of EG embryonic stem cells.This is also unreasonable. Published reports show no obvious difference for both phenotypes and differential potentials of EG cell lines.
Comments to the second manuscript:
Similar to the first manuscript, the hypothesis raised by the author is supported by the author's previous hypothesis, without any scientific evidences. It causes confusion for readers without a basal knowledge of stem cell and traditional Chinese medicine.
1.Channel and collateral points are the accumulating sites and nest of stem cells, which are formed by self-proliferation of adult stem cells and their committed stem cells.In TCM, discovery of channel and collateral points are a great achievement. These points have been shown to have specific properties, such as electricity. They have a limited numbers.This is impossible to be equal to stem cell niches, which are dispersed in the tissues or organs.
2.Human adult stem cells are classified to 4 ×2 ×8 ×7 ×7＝3136 kinds.
Obviously impossible.
3.In fact, there exist 7 kinds of primitive generative cells in animal germinal epithelium. Where is the fact?
These are just some obvious questions of the reviewer, the manuscripts are not based on any scientific work, thus are impossible to be correct and will not be helpful to the future
reaearch.
Reviewer 2 Comments:
In the paper An Unverified Meridian Theory of Traditional Chinese Medicine That May Reveal the Distribution and Classification of Human Stem Cell, the author has tried to establish a correlation between Chinese traditional medicine and current stem cell theories. He suggests that The channel and collateral points could be the stem-cell nests while the channels and collaterals could be corresponding to the distribution and classification of the adult stem cell. This theory appears (on the surface) to be interesting, however, most of the hypotheses in this manuscript are based on the authors imagination or purely speculation, and have no factual scientific basis. The author did not provide any reference resources for most of the materials he cited.
Reviewer 3 Comments:
The author tried to set up some hypotheses to explain the theory of Chinese traditional medicine by the concept of stem cells. However, all the hypotheses were without the support of scientific data. Meanwhile, the reviewer missed the key point of these two manuscripts because the author put too many hypotheses in one paper. The reviewer suggests that the author should generate enough data to support his hypotheses. Moreover, the reviewer suggests that the author should provide more references from different authors and not from the author himself.
