2024年06月四级第2套仔细阅读 Passage 2 原文翻译及答案解析

Today, most scientific research is funded by government grants, companies doing research and development, and non-profit foundations. As a society, we reap the rewards from this science, but we also help pay for it. You indirectly support science through taxes you pay, products and services you purchase, and donations you make.

如今，大多数科学研究由政府资助、从事研发的企业以及非营利基金会提供资金支持。作为一个社会，我们从这些科学中获得回报，但也帮助承担部分费用。你通过缴纳的税款、购买的产品与服务以及进行的捐赠，间接支持着科学研究。

Funding for science has changed with the times. Historically, science has been largely supported through private patronage (资助), church sponsorship, or simply paying for the research yourself. Today, researchers are likely to be funded by a mix of grants from various government agencies, institutions, and foundations. Other research is funded by private companies. Such corporate sponsorship is widespread in some fields. Almost 75% of U.S. clinical trials in medicine are paid for by private companies. And, of course, some researchers today still fund small-scale studies out of their own pockets. Most of us can't afford to do nuclear research as a private hobby, but birdwatchers, rock collectors, and others can do real research on a limited budget.

科研资金随着时代变迁而变化。历史上，科学主要依靠私人赞助、教会支持或自费研究来维持。如今，研究人员的资金可能来自政府机构、院校和基金会等多方资助的组合。其他研究则由私人企业资助。这种企业赞助在某些领域相当普遍，美国近75%的医学临床试验由私人企业出资。当然，如今仍有一些研究者自掏腰包开展小规模研究。大多数人无法将核研究作为私人爱好来承担，但观鸟者、岩石收藏家等群体可以在有限预算下进行真正的研究。

In a perfect world, money wouldn't matter—all scientific studies would be completely objective. But in the real world, funding may introduce biases. Drug research sponsored by the pharmaceutical (制药的) industry is more likely to end up favoring the drug under consideration than studies sponsored by government grants or charitable organizations. Similarly, nutrition research sponsored by the food industry is more likely to end up favoring the food under consideration than independently funded research.

在理想世界中，资金不应是问题——所有科学研究都将完全客观。但在现实世界中，资金可能带来偏见。制药行业赞助的药物研究，相比政府资助或慈善机构赞助的研究，更倾向于支持所研究的药物。类似地，食品行业赞助的营养研究，相比独立资助的研究，更可能得出有利于所研究食品的结论。

So what should we make of all this? Should we ignore any research funded by companies or special interest groups? Certainly not. These groups provide invaluable funding for scientific research. Furthermore, science has many safeguards in place to catch instances of bias that affect research outcomes. Ultimately, misleading results will be corrected as science proceeds; however, this process takes time. Meanwhile, it pays to examine studies funded by industry or special interest groups with extra care. Are the results consistent with other independently funded studies? What do other scientists have to say about this research? A little examination can go a long way towards identifying bias associated with the funding source.

那么我们该如何看待这一切？是否应忽略所有由企业或特殊利益集团资助的研究？当然不是。这些团体为科学研究提供了不可或缺的资金支持。此外，科学界已建立多重保障机制来识别影响研究结果的偏见。最终，误导性结论会在科学进程中得到纠正；不过这一过程需要时间。与此同时，对产业或特殊利益集团资助的研究保持额外审慎是明智之举：这些结果是否与其他独立资助的研究一致？其他科学家对此项研究有何看法？稍作审视便能有效识别与资金来源相关的偏见。