scholarly journals Disease, Medicine, and Health

Author(s):  
Diego Armus ◽  
Adrián López Denis

This article focuses on three overlapping trends in the historical study of human responses to illness, labeled as “new history of medicine, history of public health, and sociocultural history of disease.” The topics range from colonial epidemiology and pharmacopoeia to twentieth-century public health institutions and urban hygiene. But a consistent focus on the social, cultural, and symbolic components of diseases and cures unifies this historiography and distinguishes it from the narrower scope of the long-established field of the history of medicine.

2009 ◽  
Vol 14 (5) ◽  
pp. 137-146
Author(s):  
Constance A. Nathanson

This paper proposes a theory-based approach to the understanding of social change and illustrates that theory with examples from the history and politics of public health. Based in large part on the work of anthropologist Marshall Sahlins (see in particular his Islands of History published in (1985) William Sewell Jr. has proposed an ‘eventful sociology.’ In this work ‘event’ is a term of art meaning occurrences in human affairs that result in social change. Sewell's approach and that of Charles Tilly are in many respects complementary, a major difference being Sewell's far greater emphasis on meaning and interpretation by engaged actors as essential to understanding of how historical processes unfold. In this paper I further elaborate Sahlins’ and Sewell's ideas, first by showing their connection with concepts that may be more familiar to sociologists and, second, by examining the contingent character of social change. Drawing on my own research on the history of public health, I argue that the transformation of ‘happenings’ into events and of events into meaningful social change are highly contingent on the social and political context within which these events occur. More generally, I hope to show that ‘eventful’ sociology is an exciting and productive approach to sociological analysis.


Author(s):  
Jorge Hernández Valdés ◽  
Sofía López de Nava Tapía ◽  
Alejandra Ramos García

The history of the intervention of Social Work in the area of health has been built from a device that in the case of the Institutions of Higher Education, Social Sciences and Humanities this acquires a connotation of dispositivity in the Foucauldian sense of reproduction of social domination through the power of vigilance and punishment. In this sense, the objective of this work was to discuss the scope and limits of the positivity device for the case of Social Work and its history of intervention in public health institutions. The discussion will allow us to move towards a reconceptualization scenario in which we see an alternative intervention device that not only reproduces health policies, but also questions them in favor of the groups that are being violated.


2018 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 84-90 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sophy Bergenheim

This commentary provides a glimpse into a conceptual history approach to the topic of public health. I focus primarily on the history of public health during the first half of the 20th century. I will also reflect on its entanglement with the social sciences in later times. The first two sections discuss three core elements of the concept of public health: the “public” or collective that the term refers to, “health”, and finally, “public health” as “health of a collective”. These elements are historical and political concepts, which means that they do not have a fixed definition, but need to be placed in their historical and political contexts. In the final section, I discuss some connections between social science and public health during the 20th century.


BMJ ◽  
1957 ◽  
Vol 1 (5019) ◽  
pp. 632-632
Author(s):  
S. W. Hinds

Author(s):  
Tamar Sharon

AbstractThe datafication and digitalization of health and medicine has engendered a proliferation of new collaborations between public health institutions and data corporations like Google, Apple, Microsoft and Amazon. Critical perspectives on these new partnerships tend to frame them as an instance of market transgressions by tech giants into the sphere of health and medicine, in line with a “hostile worlds” doctrine that upholds that the borders between market and non-market spheres should be carefully policed. This article seeks to outline the limitations of this common framing for critically understanding the phenomenon of the Googlization of health. In particular, the mobilization of a diversity of non-market value statements in the justification work carried out by actors involved in the Googlization of health indicates the co-presence of additional worlds or spheres in this context, which are not captured by the market vs. non-market dichotomy. It then advances an alternative framework, based on a multiple-sphere ontology that draws on Boltanski and Thevenot’s orders of worth and Michael Walzer’s theory of justice, which I call a normative pragmatics of justice. This framework addresses both the normative deficit in Boltanski and Thevenot’s work and provides an important emphasis on the empirical workings of justice. Finally, I discuss why this framework is better equipped to identify and to address the many risks raised by the Googlization of health and possibly other dimensions of the digitalization and datafication of society.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document