In the press releases of R&D achievements of various academic institutions, we often see some sensational words such as "major breakthrough" and "key reason". Although such words can attract readers' attention and increase the exposure of research results, they may also have adverse effects in the long run. Popular science communication is to let the audience know some newer and wider scientific applications on the basis of existing knowledge, so the timing and detail of these research and development contents are more important.
In recent years, domestic academic and research institutions have begun to publicize their research and development achievements in the form of press conferences or press releases, especially in the fields of nature, engineering and biomedicine. On the one hand, this kind of publicity can boost the value of its own institutions, on the other hand, it is also conducive to the fight for funds. Stirring words can create eye-catching effect in a short time and increase people's goodwill and expectation for scientific research institutions. Giphy。
However, if we examine the publicity contents of these R&D achievements, it is not difficult to find such sensational words as "major breakthrough", "key reason", "new drug for treating ××××" and "can create ×× output value". Although from the perspective of propaganda, such words can really create an eye-catching effect in a short time and increase people's goodwill and expectation for scientific research institutions. However, from the point of view of popular science communication, there are more such propaganda annotated with sensational words, which may have the opposite effect on the public in the long run: from goodwill and expectation to ridicule and disappointment.
The contrast effect is particularly obvious, especially with research and development achievements such as medicine and health, which are closely related to public life and are highly concerned by the public. Why is there such a huge gap between reality and propaganda? The reason still has to start with the basic truth of popular science communication.
what's the difference between popular science communication and science education?
Popular science communication is different from science education, which is a process of "building knowledge from scratch" to make people who don't know science understand science. The popularization of popular science is a process of "adding value to knowledge", so that readers can know more and newer knowledge and applications on the basis of existing science.
Since the popularization of popular science is a process of adding value to knowledge, there is a certain threshold for understanding this knowledge. Just like if readers don't know the corresponding relationship between the meaning of gene and the molecular structure of deoxyribonucleic acid, DNA), then a whole popular science article about "gene editing" is not only extremely difficult for such readers to understand, but also often causes readers to have too sci-fi imagination about gene editing. The research results published by various research institutes are the popular science content produced by the public without specific objects, which is also the most difficult popular science expression. Giphy。
therefore, the primary consideration for the production of popular science content is the receiving object. Only by setting a good audience can we produce content that can be accurately received by the other party. If we look at this condition, the research results published by various research institutes are actually the popular science content produced by the public without specific objects, which is also the most difficult popular science expression. If we want to publish the research and development results of a new drug ...
As far as new drug research and development is concerned, even readers with general biological knowledge in universities may not know the general procedures of new drug research and development and the meaning of these procedures. For example, the emergence of a new drug must go through the collection of compounds, screening at molecular or cellular level, testing of animal models of diseases, elimination of pharmacokinetics and evaluation of animal toxicology before it can enter clinical trials, and clinical trials can be divided into phase I, phase II, phase III and phase IV.
There are many stages in these procedures where you can apply for a patent, for example, you can apply for a patent after screening at the molecular or cellular level, and you can also apply for a patent after passing the disease animal model, but the significance and value represented by these patents are different from those of new drugs that can really be marketed. Even if they all pass the animal model test, the patent value applied for will be different if different animal models are used. The general public does not necessarily know that the later stage of new drug research and development, the greater the cost and the higher the difficulty, and few people can successfully pass the customs. Therefore, pharmaceutical companies that have the ability to develop new drugs are usually large pharmaceutical companies that are extremely rich, which is completely different from the "pharmaceutical companies" that we often see on TV producing generic drug)〔. People have been waiting for a year, two years, or even more than three years, but they still haven't seen the specific drugs for cancer. After reading it for a long time, no matter how strong your confidence is, you will be tired. Giphy。
Therefore, most of today's media pages are only screened at the cell level, and at most, they are just news that is advertised after seeing the effect in the animal model. However, people have been waiting for one year, two years, or even more than three years for the words "a major breakthrough", "the key reason", "a new drug for treating XXX has been found" and "an output value of XXX can be created", but they still haven't seen the specific drugs for cancer. Diseases such as influenza or enterovirus still report on time every year, and patients with essential hypertension still have to take medicine every day to lower their blood pressure. After reading it for a long time, no matter how strong your confidence is, you will be tired. Does the academic research unit bring prospect or deception?
In response to such a query, the academic research institutions that published these publications may argue that what they wrote is actually quite satisfactory. If we want to be strict and picky, at most, we just don't explain the proper nouns in it in more detail, the R&D process is not explained more clearly, and the limitations of extended applications are not explained more completely. But there is absolutely no deliberate exaggeration in it, and there is no hard writing that what has not been done or cannot be done has been completed.
And those sensational headlines seen in the general media are all confused by reporters and editors, or deliberately distorted for eye-catching; We made it very clear in press conferences and press releases that those things that are "possible in the future", "very likely to be related", "expected to be created", "very likely to be" and "about to enter" are reasonable expectations and prospects, and we did not deliberately deceive the people!
that's true, but is this excuse familiar? Basically, politicians in Taiwan Province, China communicate with the people in this honest way, so we have seen and heard too many such words in various election propaganda and publicity occasions. The excuses of research institutes are just like those of politicians who claim to communicate honestly with the people. Giphy。 The "timing" of R&D achievements is very important < P > Of course, popular science dissemination is not science education, and it is impossible to explain all the details in great detail and present all the advantages and disadvantages. The purpose of these research institutes' publication is not to spread popular science, but to let the public know what research they have completed and what value those studies have. However, most of these R&D processes and achievements belong to scientific affairs in essence, so the content of publicity must involve the description and application interpretation of scientific knowledge. From this point of view, no matter how the research institutes identify themselves, in fact, the dissemination of these R&D achievements is the dissemination of popular science knowledge.
my suggestion is that this kind of publicity on R&D achievements aimed at the public should not be released, but we should pay attention to the "timing of publication". That is to say, before publication, it is necessary to check whether the things or application projects that can be explained by the existing R&D achievements have reached the level that the general public can understand, or the gap with the understanding of the general public will not be too big, just need to add a little explanation. If so, that's when it can be published to the public.
For example, if the research and development stage of a new drug has reached the stage of clinical trials today, then the next development process of this new drug can be more clearly explained to the public, and whether it is successful or not, there will not be a big gap with the public's understanding of the development of this new drug in the future. However, if the research and development is still in the effective stage of animal model, and even the toxicology test has not been carried out, then this achievement is only suitable for professional academic seminars, university classes and speeches, and is not suitable for the public to publish to unspecified objects.
Choose the right time, publish detailed contents, do not draw cakes, and do not create gods. I hope that the results of academic research in Taiwan Province, China will give people a good impression and expectation.
[Note] A generic drug means that after the patent right of the original brand drug expires, other qualified pharmaceutical companies that have passed the regulations and inspection certification can produce this drug with the same ingredients and processes. The use, efficacy, safety and other properties of generic drugs are completely the same as those of the original drugs, and the price is cheaper than that of the original drugs.