The globalization of ethics and balancing cultural diversity with universal bioethics
Darryl Macer, Ph.D.
pp. 31-45 in Cam, Philip, Ibana, Rainier A., and Pham Van Duc, eds., Philosophical
Perspectives on Globalization. Korean National Commission for UNESCO; The AsiaPacific Philosophy Education Network for Democracy (APPEND) 2006.
1. The Universality and Diversity of Ethics
Ethics is a concept balancing benefits and risks of choices and decisions. The underlying
heritage of ethics can be seen in all cultures, religions, and in ancient writings fromaround the world. We in fact cannot trace the origin of bioethics back to their beginning,as the relationships between human beings within their society, with nature and God, areformed at an earlier stage then our history would tell us.
Some trends in applied ethics are regional but most are related to some aspects ofglobalization, the expansion of respect for human rights, and the shift towards
individualism away from communitarian ways of approaching ethics. Much attention has
been given to bioethics, and inside that to medical ethics. The rapid progress of medical
technology has led to challenges in the way that medicine is practiced. The existing
systems and patterns that are seen in the relationships between patients, families, healthprofessionals, and the society in general changed. At the same time, as technology wastransferred, some values were also imported beyond the general acceptance that newtechnology must be better than old. A number of countries in Asia and the Pacific werecolonized which has significantly influenced their values and practices.
There is diversity within every society over the bioethics that each person has, and therelationships that shape the balancing of principles or ideals. The interesting point forcross-cultural ethics is at what point do you call something distinctly “Malaysian” or“Asian” or “Tongan”. The question of whether there is a universal bioethics has been the
topic of much dialogue in the last decade. Is there any Asian bioethic, as distinct to aWestern bioethic or African bioethic? We need in-depth cross-cultural dialogue and study
rather than defining one ethics as Asian and one as not. According to the popular debatesin bioethics, and as adopted in the 2005 Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human
Rights, bioethical decision-making involves recognition of the autonomy of all
individuals to make free and informed decisions providing that they do not prevent othersfrom making such decisions. This is consistent with democratic principles, and the extent
to which a society has accepted this is one criteria of the success of bioethics. However,the structured paternalism of East Asian societies is built on the idea that only the viewsof so-called experts should be heard. It also means that their views should not bequestioned, in accordance with the traditional paternalistic Confucian, or pseudoConfucian, ethos. Medicine is "an art of Jin", the expression of loving kindness (Jin) by
the health care professional. The main theme of Confucianist ethics was the maintenanceof moral discipline for the nation, society and the home; and it was to the benefit of rulers
and family leaders. Therefore, it is not surprising that many of the authorities in Asiansociety share this ideal because it means respect for them, and hence reject autonomycentred bioethics. They may promulgate the idea that Chinese or Japanese are different
as an attempt to prolong the Confucian ethic.

Macer

1

However if we look into other parts of the ancient culture we can see basic bioethicalprinciples of autonomy and justice, non-maleficence and beneficence are seen. 1 Tsai 2
shows that ancient Chinese medical ethics may follow a four principles approach, butwith more emphasis on beneficence than autonomy. I consider that bioethics is love oflife not only in Asia. The four principles of love bioethics are self-love (autonomy), loveof others (justice), loving life (non-maleficence) and loving good (beneficence).
There are other key words that emerge from Asia, such as harmony and tolerance, respect
and reverence, and ambiguity. While Asia has a rich tradition in views of life, there is
still a gap between the real world and the ideal that people like to talk about. Few of theideals of respecting life are actually applied to everyday applications, and to deciding
how to use medical technology. However, this may not be so different from the realworld of the clinic in most societies. Comparative ethics needs to break from ethnic or
cultural generalizations and start to critically examine words, motives and action.
To start a dialogue we also need to define our terms. I think there are three ways of
considering what is "bioethics".
a. Descriptive bioethics. The way people view life, their moral interactions andresponsibilities with living organisms in their life. One of the tendencies of bioethics has
been for people to prescribe what is right and wrong, of course in their own of view. If
we are trying to reach a truly global and universal description of the way people reason
and evaluate moral dilemmas we have to ask people how they think. This is especially
important in cross-cultural ethics.
b. Prescriptive bioethics. To tell others what is good or bad, what principles are mostimportant; or to say something/someone has rights, and others have duties to them. Thisis important in policy, and international cooperation in research and practice does requirea predicatable policy for the scientists, industry and governors of technology.
c. Interactive bioethics. Discussion and debate between people, groups within society,and communities about descriptive and prescriptive bioethics. New models of dialogue
have emrged such as bioethics committees. Ethics committees often have a broader
mandate for ethical and philosophical discourse than the more clinical/legal institutional
review boards (IRBs).
When we ask whether Asian bioethics is special we can consider whether there is a
special world view? In Asian style democracy public opinion is seldom influential indetermining public policy and there are no effective means used by the public to change
policy. The adoption of bioethics and bioethical reasoning is part of an ongoingtransformation of modern Asian culture. In most Asian countries no truly open national
forum has existed for any major policy, and the establishment of multi-disciplinary for asuch as ethics committees represents in itself a transformation of society structure.
Particular issues may spark this transition, and issues such as genetic diagnosis, organtransplants and brain death, and genetics and reproductive technology, are typicalexamples.
From the results of the International Bioethics Survey conducted in 1993 in 10 countries
1

Darryl RJ Macer, Bioethics is Love of Life (Christchurch: Eubios Ethics Institute, 1998).
Daniel F-C. Tsai, ‘Ancient Chinese medical ethics and the four principles of biomedical
ethics,’ Journal of Medical Ethics, Vol. 25, No. 4 (1999), pp. 315-21.
2

Macer

2

in the Asia Pacific Region (Australia, Hong Kong, India, Israel, Japan, New Zealand, thePhilippines, Russia, Singapore, Thailand), we can see many people perceive
simultaneously both benefits and risks from science and technology. 3 The diversity ofreasoning exposed in the survey on a variety of questions was independent of educationor age, and similar diversity of reasoning was found among members of the public, highschool biology teachers, and scientists. The overall statistical results are similar to resultsof surveys in Australasia, Europe, India, Russia, Thailand and the U.S.A.
The societal progression from paternalism to informed consent is occurring later in Asia
than it did in North America and Western Europe. However there is a clear change
underway. 4 One example is truth telling, which is not only related to prognosis ofcancer, but also to the issue of presymptomatic genetic diagnosis. Who should be told
the truth about medical diagnoses first? The patient or the family, or no one? The issues
are faced in not only Asia, but in most traditional societies. In Japan half the doctors willtell the truth about terminal cancer, however in Vietnam only one fifth will do so. Whenthe change in public opinion on the desire to be told the truth about their disease actuallyoccurred – and in fact whether there was a change in this desire to know what was
happening at all, is unknown. It could have been merely a recognition of civil rights that
acknowledged this desire to know what was happening, and there may not be any change
in desire to know what is happening from the patient's perspective over recent years. The
patients are more able to express themselves now.
The common response to "paternalism" is against dominant health care professionals who
despite a general public desire to know the truth, think it is not in a patient's best interest
to be told or else do not feel competent to explain and counsel the patient. Some healthcare professionals may consider that the family knows the patient better than they, andshare the responsibility of consultation with family members. In this case rather than
individual autonomy we can consider this to be "familial autonomy". 5 There are somefamilies in all societies who function as one, and other families that function as
relationships between individuals. It may be difficult to know which type of family each
one is unless a physician knows them for some time.
Organ transplants have generated much debate within some countries, and are now thesubject of an illegal international organ trade. Despite the practice of transplants andquestions of consent and commerce in Chinese, Indian and Philippine practice 6 , Japan
only accepted the option of organ transplants from brain dead donors in 1997, and South
Korea in the year 2000. The long public debate has made most people in Japan aware of3

Darryl RJ Macer, Bioethics for the People by the People (Christchurch: Eubios Ethics
Institute, 1994).
4
Akira Akabayashi and Michael D. Fetters, ‘Paying for informed consent,’ Journal of
Medical Ethics, Vol. 26, No. 3, (2000), pp. 212-4; Atsushi Asai, ‘Barriers to informed
consent in Japan,’ Eubios Journal of Asian and International Bioethics, Vol. 6, No. 3(May 1996), pp. 91-3.
5 Darryl RJ Macer, ‘Bioethics in and from Asia,’ Journal of Medical Ethics, Vol. 25, No.

4 (1999), pp. 293-5.
Carl Becker, ‘Money talks, money kills - The economics of transplantation in Japan and
China,’ Bioethics Vol. 13, No. 3, (1999), pp. 236-43.

6

Macer

3

the terms at least, and more Japanese would no what is brain death than people in mostother countries who immediately accepted the medical view. 7 Within Japan this issue
became a catalyst for extensive dialogue between different sectors of society since the1970s, and still today.
When individuals in Asia are asked to give their reasoning for their opinions overbioethical issues such as genetic manipulation of humans or animals, there is as muchvariety in opinions expressed by members of the general public in any country. Many
people perceive simultaneously both benefits and risks from science and technology.
Some issues such as genetically modified food, and modern biotechnology have led todialogues, although often the ideological divides create antagonism that prevents realdialogue. Assisted reproductive technology is being used in Asia, in countries with low
birth rates like Japan, and those with high birth rates like India. Dialogues are essential
for different groups to understand new technology, and genetics has been a catalyst forbroader forms of ideological dialogue. Networks and associations such as Eubios Ethics
Institute and the International Association of Bioethics were formed so that persons on
divides of ideas, be they technophiles, doubters or technophobes can coexist and learn
from each other.
2. The Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights
UNESCO has taken up some of these challenges of ethics through the establishment of
the Division of Ethics of Science and Technology in 1993, and the establishment of theInternational Bioethics Committee (IBC) in the same year. The IBC is a forum of
individuals from around the world and with expertise in many specialties, who has
debated a range of issues of bioethics. The implementation of international standards thathave been developed from that work in ethics of science and technology and bioethics isimportant, and there are three International Declarations on Bioethics unanimously
accepted by UNESCO General Conference (Universal Declaration on the Human
Genome and Human Rights, 1997; International Declaration on Human Genetic Data,
2001; Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights, 2005).
The most recent Declaration is an overarching document, and it represented a challenge
of debate on ethics of a global nature. In application of Resolution 24 adopted by the
UNESCO General Conference at its 32nd Session in October 2003 and in accordancewith a tight timetable, the drafting process of a declaration on universal norms on
bioethics began in January 2004. There were broad consultations on the scope andstructure of the future declaration and a number of drafts. 8
While the declaration focuses primarily on the human being, it recognizes neverthelesshuman duties and responsibilities towards the biosphere and affirms the need to deal withall aspects of the biosphere through the elaboration of guidelines and international
instruments, as appropriate, on ethical principles related to the environment and otherliving organisms. The principles in the Outline are set out with a distinction between

7

Masahiro Morioka, ‘Bioethics and Japanese Culture: Brain Death, Patients' Rights, andCultural Factors,’ Eubios Journal of Asian and International Bioethics, Vol. 5, No. 3,(May 1995), pp. 87-91.
8For details of the process see

Macer

www.unesco.org/bioethics.
4

general principles, derived principles, procedural principles and procedures. Thus,
fundamental principles are the basic principles that cannot be justified by any otherprinciple, whereas the derived principles that can only be justified by one or more
fundamental principles, without implying any hierarchy of these principles. The
procedural principles and the procedures describe the rules to follow and the framework
to be put into place for the application of the principles. It is now a challenge of
implementation by UNESCO across the world, and in the Asia-Pacific region, by the
Asia-Pacific regional office in Bangkok. The programs respond to the global calls forbioethics debate and discussion, including establishment of programs in bioethics
education and of ethics committees. Regional and National workshops and seminars toincrease knowledge and awareness of these Declarations for Policy Makers,
Parliamentarians, health care professionals, academics and civil society groups, are being
conducted which involve many discussions of culture and science.
The Division of the Ethics of Science and Technology in Paris HQ acts as the Secretariatof two bioethics advisory bodies (the IBC and the Inter-governmental Bioethics
Committee), and the World Commission on Ethics of Science and Technology(COMEST). In 2005 the IBC and COMEST had their meetings in the Asia and thePacific region. In addition there has been additional feedback from other experts on
specific consultations with UNESCO Paris and Bangkok, and the emergence of the
UNESCO Asia-Pacific School of Ethics. UNESCO is providing opportunities for crosscultural dialogue and feedback from ongoing pilot projects in the region, with large
meetings such as UNESCO Bangkok Bioethics Roundtables, Ethics Workshops on
focused themes, and a range of subregional and national workshops and seminars toincrease knowledge and awareness of these Declarations.
UNESCO is also attempting to generate sustainable ethics teaching and promotion
programmes, supported by coordinated (between HQ and RUSHSAP) comprehensive
databases of experts, existing professional networks, international legal instruments,
national legislation, codes of ethics, institutions, and current teaching curriculum andresearch activities in bioethics. By consultations of ethics experts UNESCO is mappingand evaluating pilot programmes in bioethics education, has developed a region-wide
teaching programme on ethics. Developing sustainable methods for evaluation of ethics
teaching at all levels across the region is important. Networking partners in thedevelopment of ethics teaching in the region is ongoing and in 2006 the UNESCO AsiaPacific Conference on Bioethics Education led to the development of a Joint-Plan of
Action for Bioethics Education. The assembly and maintenance of on-line free accessteaching resources, and links to all regional laws and guidelines related to professional
ethics, including environmental ethics, ethics of sustainable development, bioethics,
science ethics and cyber ethics is intended to add dialogue. Establishment of
documentation centres in the region has also started, with one in UNESCO Bangkok
being established in 2006. UNESCO is also mapping the types of Codes of Ethics for
Scientists and Engineers in general.
3. Inter-regional Philosophical Dialogues
The UNESCO Interregional Philosophical Dialogue aims to encourage open andproductive dialogue to fight against the current forces of cultural imperialism andglobalization. English has become a common international language, yet even those who

Macer

5

write in English are not evenly represented in the information media. The majority of theworld's population live in Asia, the popular international religions of the world originatedin Asia, the world's largest English-speaking country (India) is in Asia, and most people
are using products made from Asian-based companies. Considering this, we may ask
why there have hitherto been so few papers from Asia published in academic literature?
Why do so few scholars from Asia study in Arabia, or Africa, and vice-versa? Moreover,some argue in the name of globalization or a tradition like secular humanism, that not
only is there one Truth, and that they uniquely have it. Inter-regional Philosophical
Dialogues provide an opportunity to take a fresh look at the potential that dialogue holds
in a globalized world. It is imperative that we place strong significance on the concept of
dialogue and seek dynamic and global strategies that reinforce its relevance and its
strength. Dialogue can be a tool of transformation, as well as working for tolerance andpeace. Rather than universal monopoly of ideas we need to strive for recognition ofuniversal diversity and pluralism that will enable engagement.
Philosophical dialogue among people from different regions has occurred in history, andthere is no civilization on earth that has not been enriched by contact, interaction andexchange with others. In fact if we examine the cases where cultural exchange did notleave a welcome legacy, it is often in cases of colonization of ideas and much of theworld. Many conflicts have been fuelled by retreats into a particular religion or spiritual
tradition to the exclusion of all others. One of the objectives of philosophical dialogue of
UNESCO is to highlight the dynamic interplay between spiritual traditions and their
specific cultures by underlining the contributions they have made to each other’sdevelopment, through the discovery of common heritage and shared values.
One of the responses to globalization has been the rise of separatist movements based onclaims to cultural specificities, with dire consequences of war. This highlights ourcollective duty to promote and to establish a framework for intercultural andphilosophical dialogue. Part of the purpose will be in education of inter-cultural dialogue,
through the promotion of mutual knowledge and sensitivity to others.
With its Interregional Philosophical Dialogue programme, UNESCO is working to ensurethat dialogue among cultures, religions and spiritual traditions underpins the fundamental
objectives of building peace, security and sustainable development. Such dialogue
contributes significantly to reflection on such key contemporary issues as peace,
globalization, human rights, democracy, development and forms of cultural and religious
exclusiveness. UNESCO proposes to act as an interface for the formation of dynamic
networks of philosophers from different parts of the world, and particularly from regions
between which there is no tradition of philosophical dialogue. Meetings organized within
the framework of this programme aim to foster constructive, free, open, and critical
dialogue between philosophers from regions such as Asia and Arabia.
The meetings organized so far within the context of this programme have addressed
questions such as: Why is interregional philosophical dialogue important today? In what
way could philosophical dialogue contribute to the development of the study ofphilosophy? What are the necessary elements required for such a dialogue? What are theobjectives in establishing such a dialogue? Which themes/problems should suchdialogues focus on? What action plan should UNESCO take up in order to launch a
successful programme of interregional dialogue? What methodologies could be employed
to teach Asian philosophy in different parts of the world, such as Africa and Latin

Macer

6

America? What types of programmes directed at capacity-building and the exchange ofideas could be considered that would offer young philosophers a possibility for reciprocal
learning? How can an understanding of each other’s traditions of thought be promoted in
the two regions?
In the framework of a philosophical dialogue between Asia and the Arab region, twoevents have already taken place. The dialogue between these two regions was launchedwith a brainstorming meeting held in November 2004 in Paris. The philosophers present
at the meeting underlined the need for an Asian–Arab philosophical dialogue to counterthe obstacles of prejudice and fanaticism and to narrow the cognitive gulf between thetwo regions. The next Asia-Arab interregional conference was in November 2005 inSeoul, Republic of Korea. There were papers looking at Philosophical Traditions andCritical Reconstructions in Asia and the Arab World, Social Justice and Human Rights as
Challenges of Globalization, Comparative Models of Democracy, and Preserving Identity
and Preventing Exclusion. One of the common reflections was that as a result of
globalization there had been few chances in recent history for dialogue, although these
two regions had an ancient history through the Silk Road of cultural exchange. The needwas expressed by philosophers for longer periods of interaction in order to have a deeper
understanding of the positions of the other on common philosophical questions, and theycalled upon UNESCO to help provide such opportunities. The next meeting will be in
Morocco in 2006, and more will follow in coming years. Members of APPEND will be
critical to the success of this endeavour.
A similar series of meetings are being held within the framework of a philosophicaldialogue between Africa and Latin America, following the same process as thoseconcerning philosophical dialogue between Asia and the Arab world. The meetings held
demonstrated the enormous interest in initiating and strengthening interregional
exchanges between philosophers from various regions of the world. Unfortunately wecurrently lack the financial means to bring all the philosophers in these regions who wish
to participate in such conferences together, but with the cooperation of existing forums
for dialogue, together we can awaken the calling of philosophers to break the barriers ofgeography and other causes of separation, and expand these dialogues. Such dialogues
correspond to the United Nations Global Agenda for Dialogue among Civilizations.
4. Mental mapping and the behaviouromeOne of the most interesting questions before a thinking being is whether we cancomprehend the ideas and thoughts of other beings, and conversely whether they can also
read our mind. Although the human mind appears to be infinitely complex and thediversity of human kind and culture has been considered vast, in 1994 I made ahypothesis that the number of ideas that human beings have is finite, and in 2002 I called
for a project to map the ideas of the human mind. 9 Since then some have started toembark upon a human mental map with the goal of describing the diversity of ideas ahuman being makes in any given situation or dilemma. I call this the behaviourome 10 or
human mental map. Such a map is not of a physical structure but a map of ideas.
9 Darryl RJ Macer, ‘The next challenge is to map the human mind,’ Nature, Vol. 420,

(2002), pp. 121.
Behaviourome@yahoogroups.com

10

Macer

7

There are several uses of such a project to make a human mental map. These include:1) To understand ourselves, and whether the number of ideas is really finite.
2) To compare mental maps and idea diversity between persons and species.
3) To aid in policy making to make policy that respects the diversity of people in a
culture, and globally. This would help develop bioethics for the people by the people.
4) If we can make individual mental maps, this would offer persons assistance when
making moral decisions. This would give them a chance to consider all their ideas, and to
make a more considered moral choices. This would also be useful in the testing andimplementation of better bioethics education.
An idea mapping project has to start with a working definition of what would be counted
as an idea. 11 We could define an idea as the mental conceptualization of something,including physical objects, an action or behaviour that was made or could be made in the
future, or a past, present or future sensory experience. We will only know if the number if
finite after we map the ideas and the way they are linked together. We need to develop acommon framework for interdisciplinary studies of human ideas.
The current human mental map is a five dimensional model including points which
represent ideas on a matrix for all the types of ideas (ten colours at present) within aframework of seven sides. The seven sides are self-love, love of others, loving good,
loving life, loving harm, memories and hopes. Memories include our biological, socialand spiritual heritage.
On the map ideas are not single points but spheres of varying intensity, sometimes
merging with others - and a person's response to each dilemma links some of these ideas.
There are a total of nine methods groups each exploring different ways to map ideas, andthese are listed on the Internet site Behaviourome@yahoogroups.com. They include:
1) Matrix Mapping of Ideas Relating to Bioethics Choices from Biotechnology
2) Introducing the Elementary Pragmatic Model (EPM) in the Behaviourome3) Ideas Counter and Software Testing4) Testing of the Ten Ethical Laws Of Robotics in a Cross-Cultural Matrix
5) Evolution of Thinking and Ideas
6) Can Any Physical Model Map Human Insight and Creativity, or is There Something
Metaphysical About The Mind?
7) Integrative Mapping of All Ideas and Integrative Ethical Decision-Making and
Behaviour8) 'One Page Management System' Instead of Prose Mode
9) Universal Functional Reductionism in Integrative Mental Mapping: The Tenth Classof Cosmist Creative Ideas
Through the testing of cases in applied ethics we will be able to provide a framework for
dialogue among specialties and some way forward to mapping of ideas. We may be able
to examine the real impact of globalization on ideas.
5. The way forward
We can ask how do we form a mature society full of well informed and balanced
11 Darryl RJ Macer, ‘Finite or infinite mind? Proposal for an integrative mental mapping

project,’ Eubios Journal of Asian and International Bioethics, Vol. 12, No. 6, (November
2002), pp. 203-6.
Macer

8

persons? Bioethically mature means a person, or a society that can balance the benefits
and risks of alternative options, and make well-considered decisions, and talk about it.
How can national governments and transnational professional organizations apply thesestandards into the cultural milieu of communities that were found to have significant
variations in the willingness to employ technologies that would enhance the genetic
structures of organisms in the environment, or human beings themselves? If questions of
economics over-ride all other questions of human existence we will have lost much of ourhuman diversity and ideas.
The word "bioethics" means the study of ethical issues arising from human involvementwith life, and I have called it simply the "love of life". 12 Love is the desire to do good andthe need to avoid doing harm. It includes love of others as oneself, the respecting ofautonomy. It also includes the idea of justice, loving others and sharing what we have distributive justice. We can show the imperatives of love in the following sentences whenapplied to technology.
The ethical principle of loving good, beneficence, supports the development of scienceand technology that might cure sick persons or feed hungry people.
Respect for the ethical principle of self-love, autonomy, supports empowerment ofpeople so they can access technology according to their values (e.g. medicines).
The ethical principle of loving life, do no harm, warns us to do technology assessment
on all options, current and new, to provide the best alternative for the local situation now.
New technology may do less harm to environment or to people’s health.
The ethical principle of loving others, justice, makes us consider the risks for future
generations, and for all to share in the fruits of scientific endeavour.
In conclusion, if we are able to approach dialogue with our common underpinning of love
we will be able to face globalization in a way to benefit from our cultural diversity andlearn from each other.

Biodata
Darryl R.J. Macer is Regional Advisor on Social and Human Sciences in Asia and thePacific, in RUSHSAP, UNESCO Bangkok, Thailand. He is also an Affiliated Professor
in Bioethics at United Nations University Institute of Advanced Studies since 2002; andDirector, Eubios Ethics Institute, Japan, New Zealand and Thailand(http://www2.unescobkk.org/eubios/index.htm), since 1990. He taught bioethics at the
University of Tsukuba, Japan from 1990-2005. He is member of the International Unionof Biological Sciences (IUBS) Bioethics Committee, HUGO Ethics Committee, Board
Member of International Association of Bioethics, and Secretary of Asian Bioethics
Association. He has published 8 authored books, 12 edited books in English, 7 edited
books in Japanese, 160+ academic papers. Born in New Zealand, he has a Ph.D. from the
MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology, and Trinity College, University of Cambridge,
U.K., 1987.

12

Darryl RJ Macer, Bioethics is Love of Life (Christchurch: Eubios Ethics Institute,1998).

Macer

9Address
Regional Advisor on Social and Human Sciences in Asia and the Pacific,
RUSHSAP (Regional Unit for Social and Human Sciences in Asia and the Pacific),
UNESCO Bangkok, 920 Sukhumvit Road, Prakanong, Bangkok 10110, Thailand
Email: d.macer@unescobkk.org
http://www.unescobkk.org/rushsap
http://eubios.info/index.htm

Macer10