Chapter 1 defines translational research and compares basic and applied research paradigms. The chapter includes Brabeck’s (2008) quote that sets out the rationale for applying the translational medical research model of bench to bedside to the authors’ translational education research model of lab to learner. The dilemma of translational research for end users and a description of the related Freddie Reisman Center for Translational Research in Creativity and Motivation (FRC) at Drexel University also are included.

This chapter documents the changes that returnees observed in their respective Asian country’s research systems that affected their experience of pursuing scientific research in Asia. Change in five dimensions of scientific research systems in each of the four Asian case countries are identified:

1. 1. Research funding: the volume of funding available, the rate at which a scientist’s grant applications are successful, and the research areas/modalities that are prioritized

2. 2. Research administration: the policies and processes surrounding grant applications, funding disbursement, and the ordering of research supplies, and also more general administrative processes

3. 3. Research networks: the degree of connections returned scientists have, and are able to create, with actual and potential research collaborators within the global scientific field

4. 4. Research staff: the availability of postdoctoral fellows, and graduate and undergraduate students to work in scientists’ labs, and the quality and commitment levels of these support personnel

5. 5. Research infrastructure: the availability and quality of the space, equipment, specimens and supplies available to researchers to conduct their research.

For historical, social, political and religious reasons, Italy has traditionally approached life sciences, especially those involving humans, with great caution. The main law touching on human germline genome modification, called Law 40/2004 (‘Rules on Medically Assisted Reproduction’) bans most ‘experimentation’ on human embryos. In addition, EU Regulation 536/2014 contains a ban on clinical research using germline modification technologies. Nevertheless, Article 13 of Law 40/2004 leaves the door open to clinical applications of germline modification technologies. However, only the improvement of basic research on gametes would permit in the future to decide if, and possibly identify which, clinical applications are scientifically feasible and ethically acceptable. Recent developments and new possibilities in the field of human germline genome modification call for regulations that, while setting limits to contain possible abuses, do not wholly frustrate scientific and technological progress. Moreover, human germline genome modification technologies, which have enormous therapeutic potential, can further certain values enjoying a constitutional status under the Italian legal system, such as the promotion of scientific progress and the protection of health.