Science has contributed a major factor into our knowledge and understanding of our bodies. In western society, biomedicine has become the main product to promote healthy bodies. Biomedicine is a culturally developed medical approach focused on isolating pathologies and malfunctions in the organs and tissues of the body. In Deborah Gordon’s article called Tenacious Assumptions in Western Medicine, she describes a common theme of how biomedicine is a commodity of health practices. In addition to, it has evolved increasingly where it has been used as a tool in other countries, much as though their bodies are seen as objects of medical attention. This ‘medical gaze’ Foucault calls, “[is] made comprehensible and visible through language and technology, we may increasingly speak of a social scientific/historical gaze turned on medicine, describing hidden cultural scaffolding and social processes that shape practice and knowledge” (Gordon 20). Furthermore, the photos above associate with the article because it represents how biomedicine was constructed by social choices and not “natural inevitability”. Sometimes vulnerable cultures get destroyed and by bringing in our western practices with medicine we might be unaware of the changes we impose to one’s culture. Biomedicine has evolved into a hegemonic phenomenon that shapes human culture; thus, we rely on biomedicine so much that we limit our cultural (or spiritual) understanding of the true causes of illnesses and diseases.
In Gordon’s article, she splits the meaning of biomedicine into two major western traditions "naturalism" and "individualism". “Naturalism” is most refer to in a literal sense as “science”; whereas, “individualism” asserts a complex of values and primacy of the individual (21). These two traditions are significant to the images because it demonstrates power over the less powerful. Scientific evidence is the backbone to biomedicine; whereas different cultural understanding shows less evidence of understanding the body. You can notice that power and representation is displayed on the photo where the doctor is the one playing a dominant role carrying medical equipment and the patient with a lesser role because they are being taken care of as the patient. Thus, this image reflects a “cultural lag”—when one part of culture (ie technology) moves faster than another (ie behavior)—on how we find solutions to eliminate diseases and not how we can culturally understand different behaviors or attitudes of diseases (Rapp 65). Because we have relied so heavily on scientific evidence biomedicine evolved into something we depend moreover other options. The result of this dependency can eventually turn into something we are comfortable or secured with. Does biomedicine give us security?
For many years we have just been comfortable relying on medicine to just do its job in treating our sickness. On the other hand, in some cases such as viral diseases medicine or other treatment is not a solution because of unknown reasons. Thus, society falls into a false security by following the dominant practices of medicine.
Another viewpoint about the images is how the body is used as an object of medical attention—or medical gaze—for practitioners to visually see what the problem is and fix it. This “URGENT NEED” that is bolded on this image implies that “help is on the way” by bringing a doctor in who is dressed in their surgical uniform wearing gloves and holding their surgical tools. In a third world country, this medical professional would be very intimidating because they symbolize a body politic. Nancy Scheper-Hughes and Margaret Lock describe the body politic as the regulated body subjected to the rules of a society. Therefore, the portrayal of medical professions helping out third world countries may not be aware that they are attributing a body of power and control over a population. Of course their mission is to help the needs of people, but the power they posses with biomedicine is narrowed only to the embodiment of western medicine’s definition of a healthy body.
In Gordon’s article she describes how the assumption between nature and body are both distinct and are less incorporated into understanding the truth to illnesses. One of the assumptions Gordon mentions is how “medicine is usually described as ‘lacking a metaphysics’ and failing to provide religious spiritual meaning” (Gordon 24). This correlates with the images because it implies that medicine is autonomous from religion. It accounts for a separation between mind and body and not a holistic understanding of the two. In some third world countries, religion plays a major factor to developing their ideals of a healthy body. Thus, biomedicine can neglect one’s own practices.
Western medicine has evolved drastically over the past century. The necessary action for biomedicine is to be consciously aware of cultural differences. Biomedicine can challenge doctors to welcome other cultural practices with health such as acupuncture, chiropractor, herbals, or other therapeutic modalities. This can affect how we can accommodate individuals with different needs because there are still unknown reasons to the truth about the body. In the United States of America
References:
References:
Margaret Lock and Deborah R. Gordon, eds., 1988. Biomedicine Examined. Dordrecht , Netherlands
Nancy-Scheper-Hughes and Margaret M. Lock, 1987, "The Mindful Body: A Prolegonmenon to Future Work in Medical Anthropology." Medical Anthropology Quarterly 1(1) March: 6-41.
Rayna Rapp. 1993. "Accounting for Amniocentesis." Pp. 55-76. IN Knowledge, Power, and Practice: The Anthropology of Medicine and Everyday Life. Edited by Shirley Lindenbaurn and Margaret Lock. Berkeley University of California
Nancy-Scheper-Hughes and Margaret M. Lock, 1987, "The Mindful Body: A Prolegonmenon to Future Work in Medical Anthropology." Medical Anthropology Quarterly 1(1) March: 6-41.
Rayna Rapp. 1993. "Accounting for Amniocentesis." Pp. 55-
