This essay challenges the idea of progress as technological development in relation to medicine by focusing on people rather than things. It analyzes how the prevalence of such an idea of progress leads contemporary societies to a technofetishism that degrades community life and medical practice, contributing to the medicalization of social life. It is argued that the realization of technological potentialities depends on their forms of use, that the main motive of technological development is unlimited profit, and the priority developments are those that enhance social control which maintains the status quo. Intelligence as an intelligence quotient is criticized by proposing it as an attribute of the human being as a whole, manifested in the ways of thinking and acting of human beings in their circumstances, where affectivity and critical thinking are essential for their development; it is emphasized that its antecedent is the harmonic concert of planetary life, which contrasts with the prevailing human disharmony. It is proposed that artificial intelligence is the latest creation of technofetishism, which deposits vital attributes in technology, and that its use will accentuate the degradation of human and planetary life. Another idea of medical progress is proposed, based on forms of organization that is conducive to the development of inquisitive, critical, and collaborative skills that promote permanent improvement, whose distant horizon is dignified progress: the spiritual, intellectual, moral, and convivial sublimation of collectivities in harmony with the planetary ecosystem.
Este ensayo cuestiona, a propósito de la medicina, la idea de progreso como desarrollo tecnológico al centrarlo en las personas no en las cosas. Se analiza cómo el predominio de tal idea de progreso convierte a las sociedades actuales al tecno-fetichismo que degrada la vida comunitaria y la práctica médica contribuyendo a la medicalización de la vida social. Se argumenta: que la realización de las potencialidades tecnológicas depende de sus formas de uso; que el móvil principal del desarrollo tecnológico es el lucro sin límites y que los desarrollos prioritarios son los que potencian el control social que mantiene el statu quo. Se critica la idea de inteligencia como cociente intelectual al proponerla como atributo del ser humano como un todo, manifiesto en las formas pensar y proceder de las personas en sus circunstancias, donde la afectividad y el pensamiento crítico son imprescindibles para su desarrollo. Se destaca que su antecedente es el concierto armónico de la vida planetaria contrastante con la disarmonía humana imperante. Se plantea que la inteligencia artificial es la más reciente hechura del tecno-fetichismo que deposita en la tecnología atributos vitales y que sus formas de uso acentuarán la degradación de la vida humana y planetaria. Se propone otra idea de progreso médico basado en formas de organización propicias para el desarrollo de aptitudes inquisitivas, críticas y colaborativas que impulsen la superación permanente, cuyo horizonte lejano es el progreso dignificante: sublimación espiritual, intelectual, moral y convivencial de las colectividades en armonía con el ecosistema planetario.

This essay questions, with regard to medicine, the idea of progress as technological development by focusing on people rather than things. It analyzes how the predominance of such an idea of progress converts today\'s societies to techno-fetishism that degrades community life and medical practice, contributing to the medicalization of social life. It is argued that the realization of technological potentialities depends on their forms of use; that the main motive of technological development is unlimited profit and that priority developments are those that enhance the social control that maintains the status quo. The intelligence as an intelligence quotient is criticized by proposing it as an attribute of the human being as a whole, manifested in the ways of thinking and proceeding of people in their circumstances, where affectivity and critical thinking are essential for their development; it is emphasized that its antecedent is the harmonic concert of planetary life that contrasts with the prevailing human disharmony. It is proposed that artificial intelligence is the most recent creation of techno-fetishism that deposits vital attributes in technology and that its forms of use will accentuate the degradation of human and planetary life. Another idea of medical progress is proposed, based on forms of organization conducive to the development of inquisitive, critical and collaborative skills that promote permanent improvement, whose distant horizon is dignifying progress: spiritual, intellectual, moral and convivial sublimation of collectivities in harmony with the planetary ecosystem.
Este ensayo cuestiona, a propósito de la medicina, la idea de progreso como desarrollo tecnológico al centrarlo en las personas y no en las cosas. Se analiza cómo el predominio de tal idea de progreso convierte a las sociedades actuales al tecno-fetichismo que degrada la vida comunitaria y la práctica médica contribuyendo a la medicalización de la vida social. Se argumenta que la realización de las potencialidades tecnológicas depende de sus formas de uso, que el móvil principal del desarrollo tecnológico es el lucro sin límites, y que los desarrollos prioritarios son los que potencian el control social que mantiene el statu quo. Se critica la idea de inteligencia como cociente intelectual al proponerla como atributo del ser humano como un todo, manifiesto en las formas pensar y proceder de las personas en sus circunstancias, donde la afectividad y el pensamiento crítico son imprescindibles para su desarrollo. Se destaca que su antecedente es el concierto armónico de la vida planetaria contrastante con la disarmonía humana imperante. Se plantea que la inteligencia artificial es la más reciente hechura del tecno-fetichismo que deposita en la tecnología atributos vitales, y que sus formas de uso acentuarán la degradación de la vida humana y planetaria. Se propone otra idea de progreso médico basado en formas de organización propicias para el desarrollo de aptitudes inquisitivas, críticas y colaborativas que impulsen la superación permanente, cuyo horizonte lejano es el progreso dignificante: sublimación espiritual, intelectual, moral y convivencial de las colectividades en armonía con el ecosistema planetario.

暂无摘要。

Some attorneys and legal scholars argue that medicalizing transgender plaintiffs (i.e., introducing plaintiff diagnoses and/or medical procedures) in discrimination cases will enhance favorable plaintiff outcomes. Research and theory linking biological essentialism (i.e., believing social groups reflect biologically-rooted, stable categories) to prejudice, however, suggests that medicalizing transgender plaintiffs might not help them win cases and might instead backfire and harm their case outcomes. To test these competing hypotheses, we coded all published cases involving alleged transgender discrimination (N = 124) from 1974 to 2021. Importantly, we addressed limitations of existing research that narrowly defined transgender plaintiff medicalization exclusively via diagnosis by documenting various other forms of medicalization beyond diagnosis. Contrary to legal scholars\' claims and attorney intuitions, medicalization did not predict favorable outcomes for transgender plaintiffs. In fact, various forms of medicalization beyond diagnosis predicted negative plaintiff case outcomes. We discuss the implications of this research for informing scientific theory and legal practice.

Thinking With a growing body of brain science, the research and technological interventions in neuroscience have led to the rise of some ethical, moral, legal, conceptual, and socioeconomic problems. These problems and the need to establish an intellectual framework to approach them framed the base of Neuroethics. Most conveniently, the normative definition of Neuroethics is declared as ethics of neuroscience and neuroscience of ethics. However, there are more critical issues to define and frame the conceptual structure of the field. The current naturalist-positivist vision in neuroscience will extend the concept that human behavior, such as decision-making, consciousness, character, and moral intuitions, are mechanical features of a machine. Arguments from philosophical and anthropological views arose around this definition, focusing on the reductionist nature of merely a positive view of the human mind and behavior. Thinking through the pearls of such an approach and what would be at stake if we fail to recognize the importance of the philosophical-anthropological aspect of neuroscience, we first review different definitions and critics of the field, then proceed to discuss two concepts of Ethicalization and Medicalization. These concepts clearly show the established positivist-naturalist view in bioethics and the issues it caused. To better understand these two concepts, we use existing discussions and literature around them in bioethics. By reviewing the existing literature and adding a philosophical view of the field, we aim to add a new approach to the field of Neuroethics. We focus on adopting an interdisciplinary approach to Neuroethics to provide the needed background vision and theory to discuss interdisciplinary issues and enable scholars and theorists to reframe the fundamental issues of the field, such as the nature and scope of Neuroethics.

In Denmark, people are expected to take responsibility for their health, not least as their bodies age and they experience signs of physical or mental decline. Drawing on fieldwork among older Danes, I illustrate that an excessive focus on health gives rise to social and structural controversies and disparities, linking ideas of healthy behavior at the individual level with the societal framing of disease and aging. I argue that this emphasis contributes to the unwarranted diagnosis of bodily variations that naturally occur in the aging process, a phenomenon referred to as overdiagnosis, adding to a broader medicalization of old age.

BACKGROUND: Labia minora hypertrophy can be characterized by the labial tissue extending beyond the labia majora; however, the exact definition of hypertrophy is a matter of debate. While the prevalence of labia hypertrophy is very common among women, taboo/controversial attitudes and surgical interventions still dominate. The recognition and study of labia minora hypertrophy will increase our knowledge of this underrepresented anatomic diversity.
OBJECTIVE: To provide a report of the current literature on labia hypertrophy and discuss the definition, etiology, attitudes, management, and medicalization surrounding labia minora hypertrophy and the implications.
METHODS: Comprehensive review of literature pertaining to labia minora hypertrophy.
RESULTS: Labia minora appearance and measurements vary extensively, and hypertrophy is extremely prevalent in the population and largely nonpathologic. There remains a lack of standardized criteria to define labia hypertrophy. Attitudes surrounding labia hypertrophy differ globally, but in Western nations the overwhelming sentiment toward labia hypertrophy has largely been medicalized.
CONCLUSIONS: Negative attitudes and unnecessary medicalization of nonpathologic instances of labia hypertrophy is unjustifiable and comes with potential risks. There remains an impending need to demedicalize nonpathologic elongated labia, educate the public on diverse genital appearance, and improve understanding of the long-term outcomes and risks of genital cosmetic surgery.

Medical sociologists have much to gain by bringing in global health. In this article, I make the case for expanding our field by furthering sociological perspectives on global health. I reflect on my career, the influence of scholar-activist mentors, and my contributions to the development of scholarship about medicalization, narrative, and global health in medical sociology. First, I focus on medicalization, its relationship to biomedicalization and pharmaceuticalization, and critiques of the medicalization of global health. Second, I analyze the narrative turn in studies of illness experiences and the inclusion of visual materials as an integral part of narrative studies of illness. Third, I explore global health and show examples of bodies of knowledge that medical sociologists are building. Although I present each as a distinct area, my discussion illustrates how the three areas are intertwined and how my contributions to each traverse and build connections among them.

暂无摘要。

Previous research shows that men who experience erectile or sexual dysfunction may feel uncomfortable discussing their sexual experiences in face-to-face clinical encounters. Part of the reason is the stigma and embarrassment associated with discussing private sexual matters. This study examines how e-patients, or more precisely advice-seekers, and doctors communicate about sexual dysfunction in online medical consultations (OMCs). We conducted a Theme-Oriented Discourse Analysis of relevant OMCs on CH Doctor, a Chinese medical consultation website, to understand how individuals with perceived sexual dysfunction articulate their conditions and how doctors on the platform respond and provide recommendations to these individuals. Our analysis reveals that OMCs afford advice-seekers a place to openly discuss their sexual health issues and gain empowerment from doctors who assist in mitigating the associated social stigma. Upon detailed discourse analysis, however, we find that individuals seeking advice often interpret their sexual experiences as symptoms of illness that requires medical intervention. In response, doctors tend to validate these advice-seekers\' preliminary self-diagnoses by treating their conditions as medical issues and characterizing them as psychosocial problems caused by stress and anxiety. Aligning with a critical sociological perspective that views sexual dysfunction as socially constructed problems referenced against dominant norms of sexual functioning, we argue that the medicalization and psychologization of certain sexual behaviors by doctors and advice-seekers discursively reinforce and legitimize essentialist views of hetero-coital sexual interaction. Such views reify penile-vaginal intercourse and ejaculation as the only standard, successful, and desirable form of sexual activity. This may further induce fear and anxiety among adult men whose sexual behaviors do not realistically align with these norms.