The style and structure of a nation’s health care system is not an accident; it evolves organically from the character, the politics, and the culture of its people. While generalizations are always risky, a comparison of the Canadian health care system (government-managed and equitable) with that of the United States (market-driven, exuberant, pioneering) seems to support that statement. There are important historical and social reasons why the United Kingdom has the health system it does, whereas Japan, for example, has one very different. Every system brings its own unique challenges as a working environment for physicians but each brings unique opportunities. This journal wishes to live up to its international title by recognizing and sharing the differences that exist between nations to help increase our mutual understanding. I have charged many of the members of our diverse editorial board to write articles on health care in their own countries and what it is like to practice there in the field of radiation oncology. How, for example, are Turkish radiation oncologists coping with health care reform in their country? How do British radiation oncologists manage working within a guidelineconstrained national health service while delivering chemotherapy as well? What challenges does the incorporation of Hong Kong back into a rapidly developing China bring to its physicians? These questions, and others, will be answered by this series, which we have entitled “Around the Globe”. These essays, which will be published periodically, reflect the opinions of their author and will give us a snapshot, a flavor, of radiation oncology in their nation. We hope that you will be as fascinated by this concept as we on the editorial board are, and we launch this month with an article on practice in Singapore. This densely-populated, island nation is fast becoming a regional hub in advanced technology health care. How did it happen? Read on to find out. Radiation Oncology biology physics