• Convergence Security Journal
• /
• v.11 no.4
• /
• pp.19-29
• /
• 2011

After a change of government and the inauguration of President Barack Obama in 2009, there are various effort to set up a cybersecurity policy which is better than its predecessor. The legislative trend of cybersecurity is the one aspect of that. So we compare the legislative trend of cybersecurity in the Obama era to one in the Bush era and analyze that and find items which is helpful to Korea. It seems that the point of cybersecurity legislation of U.S.A. changes from tougheners of penalties to improvements to implementation system. We can find the implications for Korea From that. Cybersecurity is covered as a problem all over the nation and a security problem. It is necessary for Korea to get ready for new Pax Americana in cybersecurity in advance and to guarantee fundamental human rights.

• Health Policy and Management
• /
• v.25 no.4
• /
• pp.253-255
• /
• 2015

The concept of precision medicine-prevention and treatment strategies that take individual variability into account-is hot issue of US in the year 2015. Precision medicine is a new concept that approach patients individually by there characteristics, such as genome, life style, environmental exposure, etc. For developing the precision medicine, National Institute of Health of US has been prepared the Precision Medicine Initiative Cohort Program, at least 1 million people cohort. The US President Obama announced the Precision Medicine Initiative on 30th January 2015. He announced that he will pioneer a new model of patient-powered research that promises to accelerate biomedical discoveries and provide clinicians with new tools, knowledge, and therapies to select which treatments will work best for which patients. Most medical treatments have been designed for the 'average patient.' As a result of this 'one-size-fits-all-approach,' treatments can be very successful for some patients but not for others. This is changing with the emergence of precision medicine, an innovative approach to disease prevention and treatment that takes into account individual differences in people's genes, environments, and lifestyles. Precision medicine gives clinicians tools to better understand the complex mechanisms underlying a patient's health, disease, or condition, and to better predict which treatments will be most effective. The healthcare researcher should prepare the new medicine era such as bio-information technology convergence, big data study.

• Health Policy and Management
• /
• v.23 no.4
• /
• pp.314-325
• /
• 2013

Background: Stem cell research competition is accelerating globally since President Obama signed an executive order, repealing Bush-era policy that limited use of federal tax dollars for embryonic stem cell research. Methods: In this paper, we conducted a comparative analysis of stem cell research policy changes in three countries, including the Human Fertilisation Embryology Act (HFEA) of UK, executive order 13,505 (removing barriers to responsible scientific research involving human stem cells) of USA, and Bioethics and Safety Act of South Korea. Debates on stem cell research are based on conflicts of fundamental beliefs that exist in the supporting and opposing coalitions. We compared regional characteristics of the advocacy coalitions in three countries and presented various factors that might be related to the policy changes. Results: The UK government, parliament, and the HFEA have sought expert consultations and public opinions to establish guidelines. UK has made social consensus through continued discussion for a long time. US President's veto power was one strongest factors influencing policy. South Korean policy was influenced by public opinion and policy brokers. Also, South Korea has not made social consensus. UK had a strong leadership and strong adjustment of coalitions but US and South Korea had not. Dr. Hwang's scandal has had one of the greatest impacts on policy decision in South Korea. Conclusion: The power of public opinion was critical in all three countries. In particular, the influence of public opinion was noticeable in South Korea. Also it turned out that in US and South Korea, the presence of a policy broker who could pursue his or her goals was the most powerful factor among the advocacy coalition factors.