Citation

Biomedicalization 2.0: Medicine, Information, and Expertise in the Digital Age

Abstract | Word Stems | Keywords | Association | Citation | Similar Titles



Abstract:

Clarke et al. (2003, 2010) argue that since 1985, the ongoing incorporation of technoscience into medicine has transformed not only institutional biomedicine, but also the process of medicalization—resulting in what they term biomedicalization. I argue that since 2007, the reciprocal incorporation of medicine into technoscience has not only begun to call the meaning of ‘medical’ into question, but has made possible a new form of biomedicalization that I term biomedicalization 2.0. Biomedicalization 2.0 is distinguished by three key phenomena—extramedicality, digitality, chiasmi—and is emerging as innovations in medical and information technologies converge with network culture, venture capital, and technoutopianism at sites outside institutional biomedicine’s authority. I examine sites such as personal genomics company 23andMe and “self knowledge through numbers” group Quantified Self to argue that these and other such convergences constitute an amorphous, decentralized extramedical sphere, which in turn expands and makes salient the extramedical domain. Extramedical network expansion is inclusive rather than exclusive, however, and extends the (open) ‘free market’ rather than the (closed) jurisdiction of state-sanctioned professional practice. Next, I argue that the extramedical sphere is profoundly digitalized, and represents novel attempts to combine scientific and medical research with network capitalism rather than industrial or corporate capitalism. Finally, I draw on Fortun’s chiasmus framework (2007) to explore questions raised by the blurred and seemingly contradictory categories co-constituted with biomedicalization 2.0. I conclude by considering whether biomedicalization 2.0 might disrupt the organization of institutional biomedicine once again, not ‘from the inside out,’ but from the outside in.

Most Common Document Word Stems:

biomedic (148), medic (113), 2.0 (106), extramed (62), research (56), genom (55), new (52), also (50), digit (48), genet (47), 2010 (43), sphere (43), januari (42), institut (40), 2013 (40), inform (39), access (39), test (37), 2011 (37), within (37), domain (36),
Convention
All Academic Convention makes running your annual conference simple and cost effective. It is your online solution for abstract management, peer review, and scheduling for your annual meeting or convention.
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

Association:
Name: American Sociological Association Annual Meeting
URL:
http://www.asanet.org


Citation:
URL: http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p650446_index.html
Direct Link:
HTML Code:

MLA Citation:

Boesel, Whitney Erin. "Biomedicalization 2.0: Medicine, Information, and Expertise in the Digital Age" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association Annual Meeting, Hilton New York and Sheraton New York, New York, NY, Aug 09, 2013 <Not Available>. 2014-12-10 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p650446_index.html>

APA Citation:

Boesel, W. , 2013-08-09 "Biomedicalization 2.0: Medicine, Information, and Expertise in the Digital Age" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association Annual Meeting, Hilton New York and Sheraton New York, New York, NY Online <APPLICATION/PDF>. 2014-12-10 from http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p650446_index.html

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Clarke et al. (2003, 2010) argue that since 1985, the ongoing incorporation of technoscience into medicine has transformed not only institutional biomedicine, but also the process of medicalization—resulting in what they term biomedicalization. I argue that since 2007, the reciprocal incorporation of medicine into technoscience has not only begun to call the meaning of ‘medical’ into question, but has made possible a new form of biomedicalization that I term biomedicalization 2.0. Biomedicalization 2.0 is distinguished by three key phenomena—extramedicality, digitality, chiasmi—and is emerging as innovations in medical and information technologies converge with network culture, venture capital, and technoutopianism at sites outside institutional biomedicine’s authority. I examine sites such as personal genomics company 23andMe and “self knowledge through numbers” group Quantified Self to argue that these and other such convergences constitute an amorphous, decentralized extramedical sphere, which in turn expands and makes salient the extramedical domain. Extramedical network expansion is inclusive rather than exclusive, however, and extends the (open) ‘free market’ rather than the (closed) jurisdiction of state-sanctioned professional practice. Next, I argue that the extramedical sphere is profoundly digitalized, and represents novel attempts to combine scientific and medical research with network capitalism rather than industrial or corporate capitalism. Finally, I draw on Fortun’s chiasmus framework (2007) to explore questions raised by the blurred and seemingly contradictory categories co-constituted with biomedicalization 2.0. I conclude by considering whether biomedicalization 2.0 might disrupt the organization of institutional biomedicine once again, not ‘from the inside out,’ but from the outside in.


Similar Titles:
Why Do People Get Phished? Testing Individual Differences in Phishing Susceptibility Within an Integrated Information-Processing Model

"Gaining Access: How to 'Deal' with IRBs, Informed Consent, and Gatekeepers while Researching Individuals with Alzheimer's"

Genetic Information and the Constitution of Medical Subjects: Critical Junctures in Genome Sequencing

The Asian Body as a Business Plan: Post-genomics, Medical Tourism, and DTC Genetic Testing in Korea


 
All Academic, Inc. is your premier source for research and conference management. Visit our website, www.allacademic.com, to see how we can help you today.