Biosocieties最新文献

What can’t freezing hold still? This article surveys the history of substances used to protect cells and organisms from freezing damage, known as cryoprotectants. Dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) has since 1959 been the most widely used of these agents in cryopreservation. Here, its evolution from pulp and paper waste byproduct to wonder drug to all-but-invisible routine element of freezing protocols is used to trace the direct arc from protection to toxicity in theories of how and why cryoprotectants work, from the 1960s to today. The power of these agents to simultaneously protect and degrade is shown to reside in manipulation of chemical time via hydrogen bonding and electron exchange, thereby reframing freezing as a highly active and transformational process. Countering long-held assumptions about cryopreservation as an operation of stasis after which the thawed entity is the same as it was before, this article details recent demonstrations of effects of cryoprotectant exposure that are nonlethal but nonetheless profoundly impactful within scientific and therapeutic practices that depend on freezing infrastructures. Understanding the operationalization of chemical time in the case of cryoprotectants is broadly relevant to other modern technologies dedicated to shifting how material things exist and persist in human historical time.

In Denmark, as in many other countries, declining fertility rates have stimulated debates about ‘underpopulation’ as a threat to the nation’s future sustainability. At the same time, climate change has initiated debates about ‘overpopulation’ and ‘overconsumption’ as a problem for sustaining the planet. While both debates can be understood in terms of demographic anxieties placing sustainable reproductive futures’ central, they exhibit different ideas of what ‘sustainable’ entails. In this article, we analyze how sustainable reproduction is negotiated within agendas of respectively a national fertility crisis and the climate crisis. We do so by mapping the media debates in Denmark in the period between 2010 and 2022. The aim of the article is to contribute to an understanding of the repro-paradox which simultaneously calls upon young Danes to reproduce more and less.

The medical practice termed Personalized Medicine ideally uses all the patient’s possible characteristics in predicting disease predisposition and response to therapy, but primarily employs the individual’s unique molecular make-up in the tailoring of treatment. This change in medical practice also entails an epistemic shift towards ‘molecularization’: individuals and disease are now understood and governed through life’s basic building blocks. In this paper we argue that underlying personalized medicine is a continued understanding of the pathological state as a quantitative deviation from a normal state. In this we build on the critique of French philosopher Georges Canguilhem who positioned the quantitative interpretation of the pathological in nineteenth century medical thinking. Personalized cancer medicine takes each patient’s cancer as singular, implying that there is no ‘normal’ baseline for comparing individual pathology. We analyze cases of personalized cancer clinical trials from recent years to show that each displays a quantitative understanding of the pathological reminiscent of past thinking in two main modes: a molecularized interpretation of cancer pathology and a quantitative measuring of targeted therapy efficacy. We situate the analysis in broader discussions of historical medical shifts and in current studies of personalized medicine, to outline implications of this form of continuity.

Human tissues and cells are now recognized as an important source of health and wealth. As such, public authorities have assumed responsibility for regulating their procurement, storage and use. Looking at the interactions between law and life through the lens of ‘bioconstitutionalism’, we specifically ask how human bodily material (HBM) is regulated and explore the resulting changing relationships between citizens, public authorities and researchers in Belgium, a country where the pharmaceutical industry weighs heavily in terms of employment and economic growth. We examine the regulation of HBM and show how the Belgian bioconstitutional order increasingly promotes research by facilitating the availability and use of HBM in the hope that this will fuel the engine of innovation, employment, and economic growth. We argue that this represents a turnaround from traditional conceptions of biological citizenship, as the state’s demand that its citizens donate their HBM for research is reinforced. We emphasize that what it means to be “altruistic” is being reshaped within a new moral economy of donation, without a clear recognition of this reshaping: while citizens are crucial contributors to the development of the bioeconomy, they are excluded from participating in the governance of how this bioeconomy develops.

Recent decades have seen expansions in the subfield of pathogen genomic epidemiology, also called ‘molecular epidemiology.’ Practitioners in this area analyze pathogen genetic sequence data to identify the emergence of pathogen subtypes or ‘variants,’ including ones that have evolved to have problematic biological characteristics such as greater transmissibility or treatment resistance. The field’s prominence has led to public controversies surrounding applications of pathogen genomics in disease control. The most highly visible examples occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic, when the designation of SARS-CoV-2 ‘Variants of Concern’ by the World Health Organization shaped public health strategies, media stories, and everyday talk about the pandemic. Drawing on several cases, I argue that controversies around uses of pathogen genomics have driven the emergence of a novel kind of socio-technical form, which I call a ‘molecular public.’ Molecular publics materialize when pathogen genomic science enters public discourse through news media or similar means, followed by people recognizing themselves as being potentially at risk of becoming infected with a particular pathogen subtype or affected by policy responses to a variant. I present molecular publics as a useful analytic for social studies of infectious disease and a vector through which novel biosocialities mediated by pathogens can emerge.

This piece analyzes the way in which women that froze, are considering freezing or are freezing their eggs in Spain think critically about broader reproductive politics in Spain and about assisted reproduction. Drawing partially on previous studies around egg freezing, Thomas Lemke has suggested that cryopreservation practices represent a “politics of suspension” characterized by both reversibility and disposition, and concomitant with broader political inaction (Lemke in Sci Technol Hum Values 48(4):1–27, 2021). Drawing on feminist literature, and on how some of these women think about motherhood, it is relevant to emphasize this ‘suspension of politics’ that takes place along with a “politics of suspension,” meaning that certain matters (such as reproduction and its postponement) are only to be dealt with privately and individually, through marketized fertility preservation programs in this case. Some of the women interviewed describe these programs as useful tools within a problematic context: technologies that give time in a context that leaves them on their own to figure out motherhood (or its absence) in the midst of uncertainty and loneliness. This paper shows their critical views on these matters, while reflecting on how their experiences and desires become increasingly imbricated with the fertility industry in the making of their reproductive biographies (Perler and Schurr in Body Soc 27(3): 3–27, 2021).

Pharmacogenetics innovation in biomedicine has fostered new hope in pharmacotherapeutics and in the prevention and management of adverse drug reactions. Proponents argue that pharmacogenetics will improve drug safety and efficacy while also revolutionising marketing. Integral to this survey is the recognition that pharmacogenetics has been hailed as a revolutionary frontier within biomedicine. This expectation amplifies the anticipation and promise associated with the emergence of new biotechnologies. This progress, however, raises several policy concerns with the need to balance the creation of a unified legal framework. We outline the European regulatory framework, and discuss the current challenges and opportunities related to licensing, the development of innovative medicines, cost-effectiveness, resource allocation, and stratification. There is the need to substantiate the value of a regulatory framework and vigilant monitoring to ensure equitable access and just distribution of the benefits of pharmacogenetics in Europe.

Abstract

In Denmark, pregnant persons have a statutory right to abortion on-demand in the first trimester of pregnancy, after which abortion must be sanctioned by a regional abortion committee and may be warranted if there is danger that the fetus will suffer a serious mental or physical disability, yet what precisely constitutes ‘danger’ and ‘seriousness’ are left in the hands of the juridical abortion system to interpret. In this article, I explore how jurists and doctors arrive at and legitimate the authorization of disability-selective abortion. Building on van Wichelen’s (Legitimating life: adoption in the age of globalization and biotechnology, Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, 2019) concept of ‘legitimation work,’ I show how abortion committees make legal decisions by dividing and distributing the task of —and moral responsibility for—making life-ending decisions by leaning on established legal practice, what I refer to as bureaucratic legitimation work; risk estimates made by external medical experts, what I refer to as collaborative legitimation work; and the ethical panacea of individual autonomy and informed choice, what I refer to as ethopolitical legitimation work. I argue that in conjunction, these forms of legitimation work turn termination of almost every non-conforming fetus into legitimate acts, hereby safeguarding ableist family formation.

Abstract

Researchers in xenobiology, a subdiscipline of synthetic biology, aim to build a ‘second nature’ with nucleic acid analogues, termed Xeno-nucleic acids (XNA). They promise biosafe technologies, based on the impossibility of transferring genetic material to other organisms and controlling the proliferation of genetically modified microorganisms. Proponents of xenobiology have employed metaphors and narratives that represent the separation of synthetic life from DNA-based, constituting a safer space for the exploration and navigation of virtual biological worlds. Based on interviews with synthetic biologists and participant observation in a synthetic biology laboratory, I argue that the reconfiguration of nature that xenobiologists seek is inspired by the vision of design and governance laid out in the 1975 Asilomar conference, so normative aims of safety are co-produced with visions of unnaturalness. I interrogate the types of limits that xenobiologists aim to cross, to propose that they conceive limits as pushing beyond what is biologically plausible, finding the challenge motivating. I show that the division between the natural and the unnatural is not clearly established as xenobiologists portray. In giving priority to safety as the determinant of the permissibility of new technologies, who gets to define nature and its limits remains restricted to scientists.

Abstract

Hormones are complex biosocial objects that provoke myriad cultural narratives through their association with social activities and identities, and these narratives have the power to shape people’s lived realities and bodies. While hormones were historically conceptualised as ‘master molecules’ capable of controlling various life processes, their explanatory potential has now been overshadowed by technoscientific developments like omics- and gene-based biotechnologies that have reframed how human bodies and behaviours are understood. Considering these shifts, this paper asks what roles hormones perform and what stories they are arousing today. Through a patchwork of four hormone stories about contraception, gender hacking, birth, and autism-specific horse therapy, we show how hormones remain vital protagonists in the constitution of bodies, affects, environments, places, politics, and selves in the contemporary period. Building on new materialist approaches, we adopt and extend the notion of ‘emplotment’ to encapsulate how hormones act as key characters in our plots. They are working to complicate dominant understandings of what bodies are and can be in new ways as they mediate different plots of bodily experience, in ways showing the ongoing powerful salience of hormones and their ascendancy in the present.