車企的“猴子實驗”與精英的墮落

In 2014, Volkswagen, Daimler and BMW financed an experiment in which caged monkeys were forced to watch cartoons while inhaling fumes from a Volkswagen Beetle. The car manufacturers’ aim was to show that the nitrogen dioxide emissions found in exhaust fumes are harmless to humans — even if the opposite had already been scientifically proven.

2014年，大眾(Volkswagen)、戴姆勒(Daimler)和寶馬(BMW)資助了一項實驗——多只猴子被關(guān)進(jìn)玻璃罩，一邊觀看動畫片，一邊被迫吸入一輛大眾甲殼蟲(Beetle)汽車排出的尾氣。這些汽車制造商這樣做的目的是為了證明汽車尾氣中的二氧化氮對人類無害——即使科學(xué)早已證明了事實恰好相反。

Netflix broke the story in Dirty Money, a documentary aired last week. Since then, the companies have rushed to apologise. They have sought to distance themselves “in the strictest terms” (Daimler); expressed regret that they “hit the brake too late” (BMW); and have accepted blame for actions that were “wrong, unethical and repulsive” (VW).

Netflix不久前推出的一部名為《Dirty Money(骯臟的金錢)》的紀(jì)錄片曝光了該實驗。自那以來，上述幾家公司紛紛出來道歉。他們試圖以“最嚴(yán)厲的措辭”與此事劃清界限(戴姆勒);對“踩剎車太遲”表示遺憾(寶馬);愿為“錯誤、不道德和令人厭惡”的行為接受譴責(zé)(大眾)。

And rightly so. But the scandal represents much more than primates being exposed to exhaust fumes. It reveals just how quickly the strength of German car manufacturers can become a fatal weakness. Where was the debate over the ethics? Or an effective compliance team? And, more fundamentally, where was any sense of historical awareness?

認(rèn)錯是對的。但這一丑聞所代表的東西遠(yuǎn)不止是將靈長類動物暴露在尾氣中。它暴露出德國汽車制造商的優(yōu)勢可以多么迅速地變成致命弱點。圍繞倫理道德的爭論哪去了?有效的合規(guī)團(tuán)隊在哪里?更根本的是，還存在一點點歷史敏感度嗎?

German engineers have always sought technical excellence. But for a decade, at least, this has come at the expense of the ethical dimension. These latest revelations are only the most recent scandal: two years ago, VW admitted installing software in its cars that artificially lowered nitrogen oxides levels during testing.

德國工程師一直在追求技術(shù)上的卓越。但至少過去10年，這種追求是以犧牲倫理道德為代價的。最新曝光的事情只是最近的一起丑聞：兩年前，大眾還承認(rèn)在汽車上安裝了軟件，在尾氣測試過程中人為降低了氮氧化物水平。

Yet despite the current global outcry, only one person at Daimler has so far been suspended, while Thomas Steg, VW’s chief lobbyist, has fallen on his sword.

然而，盡管目前全球都在抗議，戴姆勒只停了一人的職——大眾首席游說專家托馬斯•施特格(Thomas Steg)主動要求停職。

This is not enough. The car manufacturers must do much more if they are to regain public trust. First, it does not help to claim that the animal experiments took place before the diesel emissions scandal became public. Although the car companies had known about the experiments for years, they remained silent. No internal investigations have been launched, nor has EUGT — the diesel lobbying organisation funded by VW, Daimler and BMW that commissioned the research — come under the spotlight. To hope that nobody would notice is not only naive; it contradicts the principles of compliance that carmakers had agreed to follow in the wake of the diesel scandal.

這并不夠。要重獲公眾信任，這些汽車制造商必須要做更多。首先，聲稱這些動物實驗發(fā)生在柴油排放丑聞被曝光之前并沒有什么幫助。雖然這些汽車公司多年前已經(jīng)獲悉這些實驗，但它們一直保持沉默。目前還沒有展開任何內(nèi)部調(diào)查，由大眾、戴姆勒和寶馬出資贊助的柴油游說機(jī)構(gòu)、這項涉事研究的委托者——歐洲運輸業(yè)環(huán)境與健康聯(lián)合會(EUGT)，也沒有被置于聚光燈之下。希望沒有人會注意到不僅是天真的，還違背了汽車制造商們在柴油丑聞后已經(jīng)同意遵守的合規(guī)原則。

Second, there is the scientific dimension. According to international ethical standards, animal and human experiments are only acceptable if scientific progress cannot be achieved otherwise. The more sophisticated the animal, the stricter the standards.

第二，要考慮科學(xué)倫理因素。根據(jù)國際倫理標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，只有在無法通過其他途徑獲得科學(xué)進(jìn)步的情況下，使用動物和人體做實驗才是可接受的。使用的動物越高等，標(biāo)準(zhǔn)越嚴(yán)格。

Experiments on monkeys are rarely allowed today — and then mostly in the pharmaceutical industry and only for the benefit of human health. Under the rules, it is ethically questionable to attempt to test for the opposite — examining how much less damage is caused to human or primate lungs when new technology is used.

如今，使用猴子做實驗很少獲得允許——這樣的實驗大多是在制藥行業(yè)，而且純粹以促進(jìn)人類健康為目的。按照這些規(guī)則，試圖為了相反的目的做實驗——測試新技術(shù)的使用對人類或靈長類的肺器官造成的損害降低了多少——在倫理上是站不住腳的。

A test series could be acceptable, but only if the parameters are set correctly. But this was not the case. Emissions were tested with a manipulated exhaust system, a fact that was concealed from researchers. Compare this with a second series of experiments at the University of Aachen, also financed by EUGT, during which people were exposed to low concentrations of nitrogen dioxide. This was approved by the university’s ethics committee, but in retrospect also looks questionable.

一個試驗系列可以被接受，但前提是參數(shù)設(shè)置正確。但事實并非如此。尾氣是通過一個被做了手腳的排放系統(tǒng)進(jìn)行測試的，研究人員當(dāng)時不知道這一事實。此外還有同樣由EUGT資助的亞琛工業(yè)大學(xué)(University of Aachen)的另一系列實驗——人類志愿者被暴露在低濃度的二氧化氮中。這項實驗到了該大學(xué)的倫理委員會的批準(zhǔn)，但回過頭來看它也是站不住腳的。

Finally, it is hard to believe that nobody rang the alarm when the experiments were proposed — especially at VW, which was founded 80 years ago by the German Labour Front under the Third Reich and has always claimed to be sensitive to its history.

最后，令人難以置信的是，沒有人在這些實驗獲提議時感到不妥并提出異議——尤其是大眾汽車，這家80年前由“德國勞工陣線”(German Labour Front)在第三帝國(Third Reich)時期創(chuàng)建的汽車制造商一直聲稱對自身歷史很敏感。

This is the most worrying part of the debacle. It is not only an example of engineers being misled and a comprehensive failure of management. The scandal is also evidence of the moral degradation of Germany’s corporate elite.

這是這樁丑聞中最令人擔(dān)憂的部分。這樁丑聞不僅僅顯示出工程師受到了誤導(dǎo)、管理全面失敗，也暴露了德國企業(yè)精英的道德墮落。

The writer is the author of ‘Regierung ohne Volk’

本文作者著有《Regierung ohne Volk(沒有人民的政府)》一書。