compared with around half for America and the European Union. The pattern was largely the same for papers published in the top 5% of journals and papers ranked in the top 1% by citations. The second analysis, posted by a Chinese-Dutch team on the preprint server arXiv in April, found that even though American, British, French, German and Japanese teams have become more likely to cite Chinese research since 2000, citations of Chinese work in 2022 were still much lower than expected based on factors like the quantity of scientific output. There was a striking imbalance: Chinese researchers cited American work more than expected; American researchers cited Chinese work less than expected. Some of this may be artefact. The first result could be swayed by colleagues excessively citing each other’s work to drive up metrics. The second does not account for differences in the average quality of science done in each place. At the request of The Economist, Dr Nagaraj and Dr Yao split their analysis by academic field. They found that Chinese researchers are particularly likely to cite each other’s research in fields like chemistry and engineering where Chinese labs produce the bulk of cutting-edge work. With fewer scientists abroad working in these fields more citations come from home.
Chinese research may be more concentrated in fields in which only local researchers are at the frontier. Another explanation is trust. According to data from Retraction Watch, papers published by Chinese authors between 1996 and 2025 were around six times more likely to be retracted than those by American or British ones. Before the Chinese government banned the practices in 2020, universities often gave researchers publication quotas or paid them bonuses for publication. Authorities have also tried to tackle the problem by cracking down on paper mills and reforming academic evaluation. But reputations take time to repair. Ignorance compounds the problem. Western researchers are often unfamiliar with the hierarchy of Chinese institutions and struggle to distinguish similar- sounding names, says Dorothy Bishop, a retired experimental psychologist at Oxford University who investigates research fraud. The share of Chinese papers with international collaborations is also in decline, in part owing to geopolitical tensions. In 2024, 18% had a foreign co-author, down from 24% between 2000 and 2019. Each study has its weaknesses. Whatever the cause, overlooking Chinese research has consequences. Ideas spread more slowly and breakthroughs take longer when researchers miss valuable work. As China becomes an ever larger source of new knowledge, the cost of such blind spots will grow. ■ To track the trends shaping commerce, industry and technology, sign up to “The Bottom Line”, our weekly subscriber-only newsletter on global business. This article was downloaded by zlibrary from https://www.economist.com//science-and-technology/2026/06/10/too-much-chinese- science-is-ignored-by-the-west
Science & technology | Well Informed The chemicals that reduce wrinkles Vitamins, applied properly, can partially reverse the effects of ageing June 11th 2026 A BIOCHEMISTRY textbook sometimes feels like essential reading when shopping for wrinkle-reducing products. Their labels list molecules like retinoids, antioxidants, peptides and exfoliating acids. The names might be familiar, but does anyone know what they do? Many of the claims that they will make skin appear more youthful rely on company-funded studies or consumer surveys rather than rigorous clinical evidence. Yet a handful of ingredients do have a solid scientific backing. Older-looking skin comes about via two distinct processes: the passage of time and environmental damage caused by ultraviolet (UV) light, pollution and smoking. All of these harm the collagen and elastin fibres in the extracellular matrix, the skin’s structural scaffolding, causing wrinkles and
sagging. Around 80% of ageing in white skin is caused by UV exposure, according to Abigail Langton, a dermatology researcher at the University of Manchester—the melanin in darker skin provides some degree of protection. If your wrinkles worry you, then the ingredient with the strongest scientific backing that might help is tretinoin, also known as all-trans retinoic acid. A derivative of vitamin A, it was originally developed as a treatment for acne, but in the mid-1980s dermatologists noticed that patients who used it had fewer wrinkles as well as fewer spots. Studies of skin biopsies, as well as non-invasive skin imaging, revealed that tretinoin thickens the epidermis, the skin’s outer layer, making it look smoother and improving fine lines. It also stimulates collagen production in the dermis, the layer that sits just under the epidermis. This seems to partly restore the extracellular matrix and reduce wrinkles. Tretinoin is generally only available on prescription and it can irritate the skin. Milder retinoids—molecules derived from vitamin A—such as retinol and retinal, are used in over-the-counter creams and serums. Once they are absorbed by the skin, these chemicals are converted into tretinoin. Pricier formulations often contain those derivatives that convert more easily or are more stable. Although over-the-counter retinoids are less aggressive, it is still sensible to start with a lower concentration (those as low as 0.04% can be effective) and work up to avoid irritation. There is also support for the anti-ageing effects of certain antioxidants, chiefly vitamin C (ascorbic acid). This plays an important role in collagen production, and there is evidence it can reduce wrinkles and hyperpigmentation. The downside is that it is unstable and can break down quickly if products are not formulated or stored correctly. An expensive cream can become ineffective if it is left lying around for too long. Peptides, another common ingredient, are short chains of amino acids. Some encourage the production of extracellular matrix proteins, others prevent their breakdown and some relax the face muscles, in a manner similar to botox. The scientific studies used by cosmetics companies to claim anti- wrinkle benefits are, however, typically conducted or funded by those same companies.
All these ingredients can be, and are, combined in different ways. And they need time to work: dermatologists recommend sticking with the same regimen for several months before judging the results and making any tweaks. But though these ingredients may partly reverse the signs of ageing, prevention is more effective. Nothing beats protecting yourself against the sun.■ After a free, evidence-based guide to health and wellness? Sign up to our weekly Well Informed newsletter. This article was downloaded by zlibrary from https://www.economist.com//science-and-technology/2026/06/05/the-chemicals-that- reduce-wrinkles
Who should win the World Cup? The most hated countries at the FIFA World Cup Steven Spielberg has more to say about aliens Saint or sinner: Antoni Gaudí’s polarising style The people behind the largest art heist in history What “Backrooms” and “Obsession” reveal about Gen Z’s fears
Who should win the World Cup? It’s a better question than “Who will win?” It tells you what the tournament is for June 11th 2026 It was too much for Ángel di María. After scoring in the World Cup final in 2022, the Argentine forward burst into tears. It was too much for Gonzalo Montiel. Having hit the winning penalty in the shoot-out—so becoming immortal—he pulled off his national shirt and buried his face in it. And it was almost too much for Argentina itself: when around 4m people thronged Buenos Aires for the victory parade, the team had to abandon their bus and wave from a helicopter. For players and fans, even whole countries, winning the World Cup is a secular rapture. One team and nation will experience that euphoria at the climax of this year’s competition, which begins on June 11th. A lot of ink
and airtime will be expended on predicting who the champions will be. But a better question than who will win the World Cup is: who should win? Answer that, and you know whom to back when your home team is knocked out. To do so, you first have to grasp the tournament’s true purpose. The World Cup is a branch of international relations. It is an expression of power by the hosts—this year America, Canada and Mexico—and a form of soft diplomacy. The draw can throw up grudge matches that are benign alternatives to war (such as, in 2022, Iran v America) and pair nations which ordinarily have little to do with one another (this time, for example, Cape Verde v Saudi Arabia). It helps supporters everywhere see what they have in common, starting with a shared devotion to watching 22 men chase a ball. But for enthusiasts, the newsy headlines—about overpriced tickets, alleged corruption or sports-washing autocrats—are not the real story. The World Cup is only superficially a pageant for the powerful; underneath it is a tacit conspiracy against them. For a month or so every four years, football nuts around the globe sneakily tune in to games on the job, knock off early to binge more matches and let the children stay up for late kick-offs. No overlord, whether company boss or authoritarian ruler, can forbid this pleasure. The World Cup is a machine for memories, both evoking and making them. As with A-list assassinations, veteran fans remember where they watched their side’s greatest feats and most painful defeats, and with whom—from lost parents to absent friends and offspring who have since grown up. Each has their own personal squad of World Cup ghosts. Above all, the World Cup is a quadrennial festival of hope. Fans hope for an injury-time miracle, the salvation of an offside flag and a distraction from humdrum woes. They hope decades of failure will at last be redeemed, and that history needn’t be destiny. Teams can embody hope for a different future, like the Argentina side led by Diego Maradona (pictured) that prevailed in 1986, not long after its military dictatorship ended. Shock victories by underdogs give hope that the meek may indeed inherit the Earth. Global communion; indelible drama; a redemption arc; the subversive sense that anything is possible: with these goals in mind, who ought to win this