The Movement for Reproductive Justice: Empowering Women of Color through Social Activism

IF 0.3 4区 社会学 Q4 SOCIOLOGY Contemporary Sociology-A Journal of Reviews Pub Date : 2023-07-01 DOI:10.1177/00943061231181317ll
Ranita Ray
{"title":"The Movement for Reproductive Justice: Empowering Women of Color through Social Activism","authors":"Ranita Ray","doi":"10.1177/00943061231181317ll","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"risk of childhood obesity. Valdez argues that we do not need this type of science to know who is sick now nor to predict who will get sick in the future—we already know. This is what Valdez calls ‘‘epigenetic foreclosure,’’ which is essentially the insights gained and lost by examining some, but not all, epigenetic variables using traditional evidence-based medicine. Weighing the Future also gives readers an interesting glimpse into clinical trial recruitment. The trials under study had goals to recruit a diverse sample of overweight women, yet recruitment did not acknowledge the history of racism in medical experimentation nor societal fat-shaming. We also saw why people chose to enroll in prenatal nutritional clinical trials; these people wanted support in enduring social and medical stigmas associated with being overweight, diverse, and pregnant in a fat-phobic, racist society (p. 138). Yet, by enrolling in these trials, the participants subject themselves to extra surveillance and management practices that are not devoid of these stigmatizing cultural conceptions. Readers are also exposed to methodological issues such as the types of data that are collected in clinical trials (e.g., Valdez notes that certain aspects of epigenetics are selectively ignored) and how they are classified. Valdez also captures the complexity of trying to categorize race and ethnicity into distinct and quantifiable categories. These data collection and classification decisions are made by the PI and research team; thus, depending on the study, different data could be collected, or the same data that are collected could be classified differently (e.g., behavioral versus biological, when the two may be interrelated). What data are collected and how they are classified moves research in certain directions, including ultimate findings and suggestions for potential interventions. These data can also be used or sold for other medical research. This book could be of interest for graduate courses in public health, science and medicine studies, medical sociology, health sciences, and race or ethnic studies. Readers are left with the knowledge that the trials Valdez observed, and others, did not find conclusive results on effects of pregnancy weight gain on offspring; yet many scientists maintain their theoretical orientations and shift those to further surveilling preand post-pregnancy eating behaviors. Thus, in our current iteration of scientific knowledge, individual bodies remain the focus, rather than larger environmental or epigenetic explanatory variables. This is exactly why we need this book and need to continue to embed social science in health studies.","PeriodicalId":46889,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Sociology-A Journal of Reviews","volume":"52 1","pages":"386 - 387"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contemporary Sociology-A Journal of Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00943061231181317ll","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

risk of childhood obesity. Valdez argues that we do not need this type of science to know who is sick now nor to predict who will get sick in the future—we already know. This is what Valdez calls ‘‘epigenetic foreclosure,’’ which is essentially the insights gained and lost by examining some, but not all, epigenetic variables using traditional evidence-based medicine. Weighing the Future also gives readers an interesting glimpse into clinical trial recruitment. The trials under study had goals to recruit a diverse sample of overweight women, yet recruitment did not acknowledge the history of racism in medical experimentation nor societal fat-shaming. We also saw why people chose to enroll in prenatal nutritional clinical trials; these people wanted support in enduring social and medical stigmas associated with being overweight, diverse, and pregnant in a fat-phobic, racist society (p. 138). Yet, by enrolling in these trials, the participants subject themselves to extra surveillance and management practices that are not devoid of these stigmatizing cultural conceptions. Readers are also exposed to methodological issues such as the types of data that are collected in clinical trials (e.g., Valdez notes that certain aspects of epigenetics are selectively ignored) and how they are classified. Valdez also captures the complexity of trying to categorize race and ethnicity into distinct and quantifiable categories. These data collection and classification decisions are made by the PI and research team; thus, depending on the study, different data could be collected, or the same data that are collected could be classified differently (e.g., behavioral versus biological, when the two may be interrelated). What data are collected and how they are classified moves research in certain directions, including ultimate findings and suggestions for potential interventions. These data can also be used or sold for other medical research. This book could be of interest for graduate courses in public health, science and medicine studies, medical sociology, health sciences, and race or ethnic studies. Readers are left with the knowledge that the trials Valdez observed, and others, did not find conclusive results on effects of pregnancy weight gain on offspring; yet many scientists maintain their theoretical orientations and shift those to further surveilling preand post-pregnancy eating behaviors. Thus, in our current iteration of scientific knowledge, individual bodies remain the focus, rather than larger environmental or epigenetic explanatory variables. This is exactly why we need this book and need to continue to embed social science in health studies.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
生殖正义运动:通过社会行动赋予有色人种妇女权力
儿童肥胖的风险。瓦尔迪兹认为,我们不需要这种类型的科学来知道谁现在生病了,也不需要预测谁将来会生病——我们已经知道了。这就是瓦尔迪兹所说的“表观遗传学丧失抵押品赎回权”,本质上是通过使用传统循证医学检查一些但不是全部表观遗传学变量而获得和失去的见解。《权衡未来》也让读者对临床试验招募有了一个有趣的了解。正在研究的试验的目标是招募不同的超重女性样本,但招募人员并没有承认医学实验中的种族主义历史,也没有承认社会对肥胖的羞辱。我们还了解了为什么人们选择参加产前营养临床试验;这些人希望得到支持,在一个肥胖恐惧、种族主义的社会中忍受与超重、多样化和怀孕相关的社会和医学污名(第138页)。然而,通过参加这些试验,参与者接受了额外的监督和管理实践,这些实践并非没有这些污名化的文化观念。读者还面临方法学问题,如临床试验中收集的数据类型(例如,瓦尔迪兹指出,表观遗传学的某些方面被选择性地忽略了)以及如何对其进行分类。瓦尔迪兹还捕捉到了试图将种族和族裔划分为不同和可量化类别的复杂性。这些数据收集和分类决策由PI和研究团队做出;因此,根据研究的不同,可以收集不同的数据,或者可以对收集的相同数据进行不同的分类(例如,当两者可能相互关联时,行为数据与生物学数据)。收集了哪些数据以及如何对其进行分类,使研究朝着某些方向发展,包括最终发现和潜在干预措施的建议。这些数据也可以用于或出售用于其他医学研究。这本书可能对公共卫生、科学和医学研究、医学社会学、健康科学以及种族或民族研究的研究生课程感兴趣。读者们知道,瓦尔迪兹观察到的试验和其他试验并没有发现怀孕体重增加对后代影响的结论性结果;然而,许多科学家坚持他们的理论方向,并将其转向进一步监测妊娠前后的饮食行为。因此,在我们当前的科学知识迭代中,个体仍然是焦点,而不是更大的环境或表观遗传学解释变量。这正是为什么我们需要这本书,并需要继续将社会科学纳入健康研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
202
期刊最新文献
How the Clinic Made Gender: The Medical History of a Transformative Idea Prisons of Debt: The Afterlives of Incarcerated Fathers Working-Class Kids Photographing Childhood: Valuing Care, Reciprocity, Sociality, and Dignity Literature in the Dawn of Sociological Theory: Stories That Are Telling On Expertise: Cultivating Character, Goodwill, and Practical Wisdom
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1