'글로벌 스탠다드' 와 황우석 '거짓말'

연말이 되면서 카드 인사도 써야 하고.  암튼 한 해를 정리해야 하는데.

그중  울 딸래미가 밤새 바라더니 끝내 꿈은 이루어졌다. 댄싱 열심히 했는데 한해 마지막을 장식하는 주말 경연대회에서 '올 해의 챔피언 걸' 트로피를 거머쥐고 만 '특별 뉴스'를 만들고 말았다.  평소 바이올린 연주회가 있어도 잘 연습하지 않는 애가 이번 경연을 앞두고 문 닫고 연습을 하더니 결국 바라던 '트로피'를 2 개나 차지하고 말았다.  예상하지 못한 수상소식에 사진을 크게 찍지 못하고 이메일 용 640*640 으로 찍었다.  이 기쁜 마음을 모두 전해야 하는데 '통하는 블로그'에만 할까 망설이다가 에구 '한 번 터지면 봇물'인데 하면서 그만 둔다.  

열라 바쁜 연말 어캐 하나.  암튼 시간은 가고 해는 저물고 있다.

 

말은 해서 머하나 하는 무의미감이지만 

 내가 황우석 관련 앞에서 말했는데 뉴욕타임즈 사설 요지하고 동일선상이라는 관점에서 볼 때 내가 글로벌 스탠다드에 가깝다고여기는데 내 같은 생각을 가진 사람은 소수라고 다시 확인하ㅣ면서 뉴욕카임즈 사설 카피 하나 열어둔다.

 

South Korea's Cloning Crisis

Published: December 4, 2005

South Korea's high-flying stem cell researchers - reputedly the best in the world at cloning - have stumbled badly in handling the ethical issues of their controversial craft. Worse yet, the research team's leader, a national hero in his homeland, lied in an effort to hide his ethical lapses. We can only hope that he has not also lied about the astonishing scientific achievements of his research team.

The South Korean team forged ahead of all its rivals by becoming the first to extract stem cells from cloned human embryos and the first to clone a dog, an enormously difficult feat. The team felt so confident in its skills that it even announced plans to open laboratories in the United States and England to create embryonic stem cell lines for researchers unable or reluctant to do so themselves.

Then came the ethics debacle. For the experiments, Dr. Hwang Woo Suk used eggs donated by two of his junior researchers, a practice forbidden by Western standards because there is no way a subordinate's donation can be truly voluntary when her job and her standing with colleagues may depend on her cooperation. one of his collaborators also paid some 20 other Korean women about $1,400 apiece for their eggs. That, too, is deplored by many Western ethicists who fear such payments inevitably exploit poor women desperate for money.

How harshly Dr. Hwang should be judged for such transgressions is a matter of dispute. Supporters claim that he was unaware of these transactions, which were legal at the time and whose ethical status was murky. Some American researchers also pay women for donating eggs, although the National Academy of Sciences has recommended against such payments. But what really torpedoed Dr. Hwang was the cover-up: his repeated lies to the effect that his eggs were donated by unpaid volunteers. These misrepresentations led his most prominent American collaborator to sever ties because his trust had been shaken.

Ten days ago, Dr. Hwang apologized for lying and stepped down as head of his new research center, although he will continue his pioneering work as a researcher. In South Korea, the public has rallied to his defense and women there are signing up in droves to donate eggs. South Korea seems to be emerging from the crisis by imposing even stricter egg donation standards than apply in this country.

The key unresolved issue is whether lying about egg donations suggests that the Korean team may have lied about its scientific results. So far there is no evidence of that. Indeed, American collaborators and observers remain confident that the team's achievements were real. But science is an enterprise that relies heavily on trust. The Koreans should not be surprised if their next scientific breakthrough is greeted with extreme caution.