Sports science plays a critical role in enhancing athletes’ competitive performance and safeguarding their health. Systematic data monitoring and precise analysis can be used to help athletes make effective and science-based training adjustments to improve their speed, explosiveness, muscle strength, aerobic endurance and agility, thereby enhancing overall competitiveness.
The controversial research project at National Taiwan Normal University (NTNU) — in which current and former members of the women’s soccer team revealed they were coerced into giving blood samples three times per day for periods of 14 days over the course of several years and threatened with failure should they refuse to comply — was originally intended to fulfill this mission, helping athletes grow and achieve breakthroughs in performance.
However, upon reading the reports published by project leader Chen Chung-ching (陳忠慶), long-time women’s varsity soccer coach Chou Tai-ying (周台英), associate professor Tseng Wei-chin (曾暐晉) and others at NTNU, I felt disappointed and concerned. Despite the research projects being carried out over a span of five years — from 2019 to last year — they lacked evidence of any significant improvements in key physical performance indicators among the subjects and provide no timely or actionable training feedback.
Such insufficient outcomes highlight deep-rooted issues in project design, implementation and management, and indicate a serious flaw — an unclear division of responsibilities between the principal investigator and the team responsible for executing research.
In terms of quality and outcomes, Chen’s projects fell short of required standards. There were no reasonable or observable improvements in the athletes’ physical performance indicators, such as speed, explosiveness, muscular strength, aerobic endurance and agility. Furthermore, the projects failed to provide specific and actionable training recommendations. Such poor research results are not only a waste of precious national resources, but an erosion of academic integrity, damaging the hopes of athletes and teams striving to make progress.
With regard to day-to-day execution of the projects, technical operations were primarily handled by graduate students such as Chou and Tseng, who were responsible for their overall implementation. However, research design, project management and supervision should have been part of Chen’s core responsibilities. The roles of the different parties involved in a project should not be obfuscated — excessive pressure and responsibility should never be placed on those responsible for implementation, nor should those team members be made scapegoats for broader failures in leadership and oversight.
Despite delivering poor and underwhelming results, this series of research projects repeatedly received funding from the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC), given an annual budget of about NT$9 million (US$301,457). This points to structural issues within the NSTC’s review mechanisms, including a lack of transparency and the presence of conflicts of interest. Conveners of some review committees might have close ties with research teams applying for funding — and thus essentially act as both player and referee — which compromises the fairness and impartiality of the evaluation process. As time has passed, specific cliques have formed within the intellectual community and monopolized research resources, severely hindering the development of cross-disciplinary collaboration with new generations of academics — a phenomenon that has led to a vicious cycle detrimental to the overall research environment in the field of sports science.
The aforementioned issues have dealt a serious blow to the healthy development of sports science and the meaningful development of athletes in Taiwan, giving rise to systemic barriers. There is an urgent need for the authorities to conduct an earnest and thorough review, and implement fundamental reforms to the current review and oversight mechanisms of scientific research projects.
These changes should include, but not be limited to — stricter regulations surrounding conflicts of interest, establishing a more transparent and diverse review process, limiting the number of concurrent projects that can be held by a single principal investigator to prevent repeated applications and a waste of resources, and strictly enforcing research ethics reviews to protect the rights and interests of research subjects. Such measures would ensure that research results are scientifically valuable and practical.
Fundamental and systemic reform is needed to eliminate the vicious cycle of funding misuse followed by poor results in research and development. Only then could we ensure that the nation’s resources are being invested toward research that truly enhances Taiwan’s sports competitiveness. The case of the NTNU women’s soccer team should alarm the sports and academic communities. The authorities must strengthen oversight and accountability, and thoroughly avoid instances of blurred responsibilities and misallocated resources, so that the nation’s future of sports science research can develop in a healthy and positive direction.
Chang Ray-tai is a retired professor of physical education.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) challenges and ignores the international rules-based order by violating Taiwanese airspace using a high-flying drone: This incident is a multi-layered challenge, including a lawfare challenge against the First Island Chain, the US, and the world. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) defines lawfare as “controlling the enemy through the law or using the law to constrain the enemy.” Chen Yu-cheng (陳育正), an associate professor at the Graduate Institute of China Military Affairs Studies, at Taiwan’s Fu Hsing Kang College (National Defense University), argues the PLA uses lawfare to create a precedent and a new de facto legal
In the first year of his second term, US President Donald Trump continued to shake the foundations of the liberal international order to realize his “America first” policy. However, amid an atmosphere of uncertainty and unpredictability, the Trump administration brought some clarity to its policy toward Taiwan. As expected, bilateral trade emerged as a major priority for the new Trump administration. To secure a favorable trade deal with Taiwan, it adopted a two-pronged strategy: First, Trump accused Taiwan of “stealing” chip business from the US, indicating that if Taipei did not address Washington’s concerns in this strategic sector, it could revisit its Taiwan
Chile has elected a new government that has the opportunity to take a fresh look at some key aspects of foreign economic policy, mainly a greater focus on Asia, including Taiwan. Still, in the great scheme of things, Chile is a small nation in Latin America, compared with giants such as Brazil and Mexico, or other major markets such as Colombia and Argentina. So why should Taiwan pay much attention to the new administration? Because the victory of Chilean president-elect Jose Antonio Kast, a right-of-center politician, can be seen as confirming that the continent is undergoing one of its periodic political shifts,
Taiwan’s long-term care system has fallen into a structural paradox. Staffing shortages have led to a situation in which almost 20 percent of the about 110,000 beds in the care system are vacant, but new patient admissions remain closed. Although the government’s “Long-term Care 3.0” program has increased subsidies and sought to integrate medical and elderly care systems, strict staff-to-patient ratios, a narrow labor pipeline and rising inflation-driven costs have left many small to medium-sized care centers struggling. With nearly 20,000 beds forced to remain empty as a consequence, the issue is not isolated management failures, but a far more
RSS