Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences最新文献

This paper deals with the ways in which the intellectual and political history of AIDS can assist in the chronological conceptualization of a pandemic such as COVID-19 as it is unfolding. It problematizes the idea of pandemic "beginnings" and "ends" to show that such definitions are shaped by the disciplinary location and thematic foci of relevant scholars. Central to this analysis is the notion that ethical and political contexts affect research on a pandemic in different ways at national and global levels at various points in its trajectory. The article develops this argument in relation to two main themes: firstly, with reference to the history of AIDS research in South Africa; secondly, with the philosophical concept of bioagency to understand the ways in which viruses and humans co-shape the course of epidemics over time. I first make the case for the development of historically informed, long-term ethnographic studies of COVID-19. Using bioagency as a point of departure to consider viruses as social actors, the essay then critiques the notion of bioinformationalism as catalyzing the widening accessibility of biomedical research. Instead, I discuss the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries as protagonists in the operation of biocapital. I argue that the history of AIDS in South Africa can provide methodological and theoretical insights into how to interpret an unfolding epidemic, outlining an ambitious transdisciplinary research agenda for thinking about the temporality of a pandemic spanning the different, interconnected, scales of life.

This article focuses on Brazil and Peru, the Latin American epicenter of the coronavirus pandemic during 2020 and 2021. The pandemic magnified the legacy of years of neoliberal policies, corruption and racism in these countries, the limitations of their poverty-reduction programs, the fragility of their democratic systems, and the insufficient political regard for public health and basic sanitation. I rely on the concepts of negligence and necropolitics. The first refers to the abdication of authorities in providing sufficient basic services to its citizens. The second - coined by Achille Mbembe before the pandemic - is used to explain the banalization by governments of preventable deaths of discriminated social groups. On a global level, the problematic access to medical equipment and vaccines was a failure because of the hoarding of vaccines by rich nations and the blaming of developing countries for their high mortality. The result was that national and international governmental reactions to COVID-19 worsened health asymmetries within countries and between the Global North and South.

Using the examples of plague, smallpox, and HIV/AIDS, the present essay argues for the benefits of incorporating the evolutionary histories of pathogens, beyond visible epidemic spikes within human populations, into our understanding of what pandemics actually are as epidemiological phenomena. The pandemic arc - which takes the pathogen as the defining "actor" in a pandemic, from emergence to local proliferation to globalization - offers a framework capable of bringing together disparate aspects not only of the manifestations of disease but also of human involvement in the pandemic process. Pathogens may differ, but there are common patterns in disease emergence and proliferation that distinguish those diseases that become pandemic, dispersed through human communities regionally or globally. The same methods of genomic analysis that allow tracking the evolutionary development of a modern pathogen such as SARS-CoV-2 also allow us to trace pandemics into the past. Reconstruction of these pandemic arcs brings new elements of these stories into view, recovering the experiences of regions and populations hitherto overlooked by Eurocentric narratives. This expanded global history of infectious diseases, in turn, lays a groundwork for reconceiving what ambitions a truly global health might aim for.

Over the last several decades, a growing group of environmental and medical historians have argued that engagement with the materiality of disease is critical to eroding the false boundaries between environment and health, and especially to the historical study of major epidemics and pandemics. This article evaluates the ways in which environmental and medical historians have engaged materiality when thinking through questions of infectious disease. It argues that far from eschewing cultural constructions of disease and analysis of medical systems, these works demonstrate that engagement with materiality in the study of disease articulates the stakes of medical regimes and practices of healing, and renders legible the multiple scales at which epidemics occur. Addressing key controversies in the use of sources, it provides examples of works that incorporate material objects, biological ideas and actors, and non-humans without falling prey to the extremes of "biological determinism" or "constructivism." It argues that commonalities in the methods employed by these works - utilization of scientific frameworks and data, multispecies analysis, attention to scale, and spatial thinking - reveal unseen and untold aspects of past pandemics. It concludes with a brief example of how these frameworks come together in practice through a case study on the history of enteric fever in Dublin, Ireland.

This essay builds on the exciting trove of disaster social science research surfacing since the earliest days of the COVID-19 pandemic. It tracks the ways that both practitioners of medicine and public health, and their social science analogues, have approached the pandemic, explicitly considering the ways they reached for new concepts to explain the temporal phenomena presented by COVID-19 and its global course. The essay highlights a series of interviews conducted in the first two years of the pandemic as part of the COVIDCalls podcast. COVID is the moment for a scholarly convergence that was missed after September 11, and again after Hurricane Katrina, and should not be missed again. Accordingly, this essay explores themes where medicine/health studies and disaster studies seem to offer great help to one another in making sense of our COVID times: the origins of disaster, disasters in combination, and the end of a disaster.

The primary claim of this essay is that historical fluency is required for effective work in crafting legal and policy interventions as a part of public health emergency preparedness and response (PHEPR). At a broad level, public health law is explicitly recognized as a key systems-level component of PHEPR practice.1 This essay therefore focuses on the extent to which historical fluency is necessary or at least useful to all aspects of PHEPR that draw on or deploy legal and policy mechanisms (e.g., design, planning, implementation, dissemination, monitoring and evaluation, etc.). The essay collectively refers to these legal and policy mechanisms as epidemic law and policy response (ELAPR). Part I explains the concept of historical fluency. Part II explores the foundations of public health law both as a way of highlighting key structural features of ELAPR and in supporting the claim that historical fluency is critical for ELAPR. Part III applies the previous arguments to a specific case study to highlight the promise and power of historical fluency - the outbreak of bubonic plague in San Francisco in 1900. Tracking this essay's pragmatic focus, part IV offers several recommendations for how specifically historical fluency in public health law and ethics can be operationalized in PHEPR practice and policy. Part V summarizes and concludes.

Many accounts, autobiographical and scholarly, emphasize how volunteers portrayed their work in the mission established for fishers by British physician Wilfred Grenfell in Newfoundland and Labrador: as escapist adventure. Scholars have not studied women physicians or their motivations to volunteer, however. This oversight derives from their small number combined with lack of knowledge about this mission's distinction from the foreign medical missions and domestic frontier missions that drew many women physicians to permanent positions. This study therefore discusses two American physicians, Alfreda B. Withington (1860-1951) and Emma E. Musson (1862-1913), who volunteered for summer service with this mission in 1907 and 1909, respectively. Through their publications, biographical sources, and clinical accounts, it reveals the appeal to them of such temporary, accessible volunteer service as a working vacation that rejuvenated. Importantly, it counters the skewed perspective of contemporary accounts in which the connection of Withington and Musson to an international celebrity, Wilfred Grenfell, overrode fuller considerations of their own lives, careers, and experiences. Finally, this examination suggests possible differences in their volunteerism between women physicians and their male counterparts: along with other women professionals, medical women often incorporated volunteer vacation experience into a continuum of similar endeavors in their careers.