Entries from blog.bioethics.net tagged with 'South Korea'

Should Hwang Do Time in the Big House?

For the disgrace and shame he placed upon stem cell research in South Korea and for many stem cell research more generally, he should do some time in the slammer. Or at least that's my view. But Nature.com tells us that Woo Suk Hwang's verdict is imminently on the horizon... (read the rest)

Who Will Care for All The Little "Snuppies" If Hwang Woo-suk Goes To Jail?

After a three-year trial and international disgrace, South Korean prosecutors have announced that their desired punishment for the Korean stem cell researchers fraud and general discrediting, not just of South Korean stem cell research, but for a time of stem cell research more broadly, would be a four-year prison term,... (read the rest)

Stem Cell Research in South Korea: Here We Go Again?

The South Koreans have decided to hop on the human embryonic stem cell research merry-go-round again, conditionally lifting a ban on the use of human eggs in research says AFP. But will the ethics safeguards put in place be enough to ensure that this time the fraud and ethics violations... (read the rest)

feed these results

If you use an RSS reader, you can subscribe to a feed of all future entries from blog.bioethics.net tagged 'South Korea'. [What is this?]

Subscribe to feed Subscribe to feed

tags from blog.bioethics.net

abortion (9)

Abraham Lincoln (1)

academia (8)

academic publishing (6)

addiction (3)

Africa (2)

aging (2)

agriculture (1)

airlines (1)

AJOB (22)

AJOB Neuroscience (1)

AJOB Primary Research (1)

alcohol (1)

allergies (1)

ALS (1)

Alta Charo (1)

AMA (2)

American Journal of Bioethics (6)

Andrew Wakefield (1)

animals (16)

anorexia (1)

anthrax (1)

APA (1)

archaeology (1)

Art Caplan (26)

artificial intelligence (2)

ASBH (3)

assisted reproduction (1)

athletics (1)

autism (9)

award (1)

Barack Obama (1)

basic research (1)

beyond genetics (1)

bias (1)

BIID (1)

BioEdge (1)

bioethics (32)

bioethics.net (17)

biotechnology (6)

bioterrorism (1)

birth weight (1)

blog.bioethics.net (10)

blogs (3)

BMJ (2)

book (1)

brain-computer interface (1)

breast cancer (4)

Britain (1)

business ethics (1)

cadavers (1)

California (2)

Canada (1)

cancer (3)

caregiver (1)

Catholic chuch (3)

CDC (2)

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (1)

cessation (1)

cheating (1)

chemistry (1)

chemotherapy (2)

children (31)

chimeras (5)

China (6)

chocolate (1)

Christian (1)

cigarettes (1)

civil rights (1)

clinical ethics (5)

clinical trials (8)

cloning (18)

Coast IRB (1)

COBRA (1)

commission (2)

conferences (1)

conflict of interest (6)

consumer (1)

contraception (1)

cord blood (1)

cosmetic surgery (4)

cosmetics (1)

courts (1)

CPR (1)

Craig Venter (8)

crime (1)

databases (3)

death (4)

death penalty (5)

dementia (1)

democracy (1)

Democrats (1)

dental health (1)

developing countries (7)

development (1)

devices (1)

diabetes (1)

disability (1)

diversity (1)

DNA (4)

DNR (2)

doctors (41)

donation (1)

drug abuse (2)

e-card (1)

eating disorders (1)

economics (3)

education (1)

egg donation (5)

eggs for research (1)

elderly (1)

election 2008 (15)

electronic health records (1)

Elsevier (4)

embryos (13)

emergencies (2)

emergency research (1)

empirical bioethics (2)

employment (1)

end of life (4)

enhancement (25)

environment (3)

epidemics (1)

epidemiology (2)

ethical (1)

ethicist (2)

ethics (28)

Europe (1)

euthanasia (3)

evolution (3)

exercise (1)

Ezekiel Emanuel (1)

face (1)

facebook (4)

families (3)

FDA (18)

federalism (2)

fertility tourism (1)

flight simulators (1)

fMRI (2)

following up (1)

food (17)

food ethics (6)

forensics (1)

funding (2)

games (1)

gay rights (1)

gender (4)

gender theory (1)

gene therapy (3)

genetic disease (9)

genetic engineering (1)

genetic modification (5)

genetic testing (26)

genetics (24)

genomics (12)

Geron (1)

Glenn McGee (15)

glenn mcgee (2)

Google (1)

government (5)

Harvard (2)

healing (1)

health (16)

health 2.0 (1)

health insurance (27)

health reform (18)

healthcare (40)

hearing (1)

heart attack (2)

HIV/AIDS (3)

holocaust (1)

hospitals (8)

human rights (1)

humanities (1)

humans (1)

Hurricane Katrina (1)

Hwang Woo-suk (2)

Ian Wilmut (1)

illness (1)

industry (7)

infants (1)

infectious disease (12)

influenza (18)

informed consent (3)

injury (1)

Institute of Medicine (1)

insurance (2)

international (7)

internet (8)

interview (1)

iphone (2)

iPS cells (19)

Iran (1)

IRB (2)

IVF (2)

James Fossett (1)

John McCain (1)

Johns Hopkins (2)

Johns Hopkins University (1)

Joseph Biden (3)

journalism (2)

Kevorkian (2)

kidneys (2)

law (15)

legislation (2)

Leon Kass (1)

liberty (1)

license (1)

living donors (1)

longevity (2)

lying (1)

March of Dimes (1)

Marfan syndrome (1)

marriage (1)

massage (1)

masters degree (1)

media (13)

medical devices (5)

medical education (3)

medical ethics (10)

medical marijuana (2)

medical schools (11)

Medicare (2)

medicine (5)

memory (1)

mental illness (2)

MercatorNet (1)

Merck (4)

military (1)

Mitt Romney (1)

mobile (1)

models (2)

money (3)

Montana (1)

morality (3)

multiple births (1)

nanotechnology (18)

neuroethics (20)

neuroimaging (2)

neuromarketing (2)

neuroscience (27)

New York (1)

news (1)

news top 5 (17)

NHS (1)

NIH (2)

northfield laboratories (1)

Notre Dame (1)

NUBC (1)

nurse (1)

nutraceuticals (1)

nutrition (1)

NYT (2)

NYU (1)

Obama (5)

obesity (12)

octomom (1)

octuplets (3)

Olympics (2)

online (1)

oprah (1)

organ donation (19)

organ sales (5)

organ transplants (18)

pain managment (2)

pandemics (8)

parents (1)

partner notification (1)

patient rights (4)

patients (7)

Paul Wolpe (1)

payment (1)

peer-review (1)

Perfect Baby (1)

personalized medicine (4)

Peter Singer (1)

PGD (1)

pharmaceuticals (24)

pharmacists (5)

philanthropy (1)

philosophy (5)

physician assisted suicide (3)

placebo (1)

planned parenthood (1)

podcasts (1)

policy (7)

politics (69)

polyheme (1)

popularized science (11)

pregnancy (5)

premiums (1)

President Obama (2)

prison (1)

privacy (12)

pro-life (1)

provigil (1)

psychology (8)

public health (30)

public opinion (3)

quality improvement (1)

radiology (1)

ranking (1)

rationing (2)

records (1)

reform (1)

regulation (13)

religion (7)

Reloxin (1)

reproduction (22)

reproductive technology (21)

research (31)

research ethics (26)

research funding (3)

residency (2)

review board (1)

Rick Weiss (1)

robots (10)

rss (1)

Sarah Palin (1)

SCHIP (1)

scholarship (4)

school (1)

science (2)

sex (4)

sex education (2)

sleep (2)

smoking (4)

Snuppy (1)

social networking (1)

South Korea (3)

space (1)

sperm donation (6)

sports (7)

Stanford University (1)

state regulation (18)

STD (1)

stem (1)

stem cell research (8)

stem cells (71)

stroke (1)

surgeon general (1)

surgery (2)

swine (13)

synthetic biology (10)

taxes (3)

technology (9)

teenagers (1)

telemedicine (1)

television (7)

terminal illness (1)

terrorism (1)

Texas (4)

The Scientist (4)

therapy (2)

tobacco (1)

Today Show (3)

torture (1)

transgenic (1)

transplantation (3)

Twitter (1)

UK (2)

UMBC (1)

undergraduate (1)

uninsured (1)

University of Pennsylvania (1)

vaccines (17)

vatican (1)

veterans affairs (1)

veterans day (1)

video (1)

voting (1)

war (1)

war on terror (1)

Washington Post (1)

weather (1)

Wesley Smith (1)

WHO (1)

women (10)

work (1)

xenograft (1)

yuck factor (3)

Zoloth (1)