68 research outputs found
DNA i jego metafory
No full textThe aim of the present paper is to describe the main metaphors presented in genetic discourse: DNA as text, information, language, book, code, project/blueprint, map, computer, music, and cooking. It also analyses the social implication of these metaphors. The author of this article argues that metaphors are double-edged swords: while they brighten difficult and abstract genetic concepts, they also lead to the misunderstanding and misinterpretation of the reality. The reason for this is that most of these metaphors are of deterministic, reductionist, and fatalistic character. Consequently, they shift the attention from complexity of genetic processes. Moreover, as they appeal to emotions, ascetics, and morality they may involve exaggeration: while they bring hope, they also create an atmosphere of fear over the misuse of genetic knowledge. The author of this article states that the genetic metaphors do not simply reflect the social ideas on DNA, but also shape our understanding of genetics and imagination on the social application of genetic knowledge. Due to this reason, DNA should be understood not only as a biological code, but as a cultural as well.Celem tekstu jest charakterystyka głównych metafor obecnych w dyskursie genetycznym: tekstu/informacji/języka/książki, kodu, projektu/matrycy, mapy, metafory komputerowej, muzycznej i kulinarnej. Podejmuję także próbę ukazania ich społecznych implikacji. Twierdzę, że metafory są mieczem obosiecznym: pomagając wyjaśnić abstrakcyjne koncepcje genetyki, utrudniają zarazem zrozumienie otaczającej nas rzeczywistości, co wynika z tego, że większość z nich ma charakter deterministyczny, redukcjonistyczny i fatalistyczny, przez co odwracają uwagę od złożoności procesów genetycznych. Nadto, odwołując się do emocji, zmysłu estetycznego i moralności, rozniecają towarzyszącą badaniom genetycznym atmosferę sensacji: rozbudzają nadzieje i kreują atmosferę strachu przed nadużyciami związanymi z rozwojem genetyki. Twierdzę także, że metafory genetyki nie są wyłącznie odbiciem społecznych idei na temat DNA, ale same kształtują nasze wyobrażenia o roli i społecznych zastosowaniach informacji genetycznej. To zaś sprawia, że DNA jest nie tylko kodem biologicznym, ale również kulturowym
DNA AND ITS METAPHORES
No full textThe aim of the present paper is to describe the main metaphors presented in genetic discourse: DNA as text, information, language, book, code, project/blueprint, map, computer, music, and cooking. It also analyses the social implication of these metaphors. The author of this article argues that metaphors are double-edged swords: while they brighten difficult and abstract genetic concepts, they also lead to the misunderstanding and misinterpretation of the reality. The reason for this is that most of these metaphors are of deterministic, reductionist, and fatalistic character. Consequently, they shift the attention from complexity of genetic processes. Moreover, as they appeal to emotions, ascetics, and morality they may involve exaggeration: while they bring hope, they also create an atmosphere of fear over the misuse of genetic knowledge. The author of this article states that the genetic metaphors do not simply reflect the social ideas on DNA, but also shape our understanding of genetics and imagination on the social application of genetic knowledge. Due to this reason, DNA should be understood not only as a biological code, but as a cultural as well
„Homo geneticus” as a „zoon genetikon”. He right not to know and the duty to know in the era of genetic risk
No full textDevelopment of new biotechnologies, including genetic tests, create new diagnostic and therapeutic opportunities. Nevertheless, as genes are shared with others many emphasize public dimension of genetic information, which transformations medical ethics and patient’s right not to know. It results in emergence of ethos of duty, which constitutes a basis for the concept of “biological citizenship”. Together they impose on individuals duties to undergo the test, to know the risk, to share that information with others and to undertake “appropriate” preventive steps. The study presents arguments for and against patient’s right not to know about one’s genetic risk. In contrast to many studies which focus of professional perspective it compares attitudes of geneticists and family members of patients affected by Huntington disease, members of Polish Society of Huntington Disease. Additionally, the paper explores new opportunities genetics creates for biopower. Key words: bioethics, biological citizenship, biopower, Huntington disease, ethos of duty, geneticization, duty to know, right not to know, sociology of genetics, Polish Society of Huntington Disease.Udostępnienie publikacji Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego finansowane w ramach projektu „Doskonałość naukowa kluczem do doskonałości kształcenia”. Projekt realizowany jest ze środków Europejskiego Funduszu Społecznego w ramach Programu Operacyjnego Wiedza Edukacja Rozwój; nr umowy: POWER.03.05.00-00-Z092/17-00
Genetization of Society. Social Implications of the New Genetics
No full textThe 20th century witnessed the emergence of a new paradigm: genetic determinism which permeates biology, medicine and Western culture. It is commonly believed that the answer to questions regarding human health, personality traits, behavior and human nature in general can be found in human genome. The paper aims to look beyond the medicalization thesis toward the process of genetisation of society. Its main tenet is that the development of new genetics transforms social relations, culture, society and politics. Therefore, the objectives of the author are: 1) to discuss the impact of the new genetics on the emergence of new expressions of personal and collective identities, new forms of biopolitics and governmentality as well as the transformation of the idea of citizenship and ethos of duty, and 2) to present a critical analysis of the discourse of the new genetics.Wiek XX był świadkiem narodzin nowego paradygmatu: genetycznego determinizmu, który przenika biologię, medycynę i kulturę Zachodu. Powszechnie uważa się, że w genach tkwi odpowiedź na pytania o ludzkie choroby, cechy osobowości i zachowania, a nawet na- turę ludzką. Tematem tekstu jest wyłaniająca się z tezy o medykalizacji życia społecznego genetyzacja społeczeństwa. Podstawowym twierdzeniem tekstu jest założenie, że rozwój no- wej genetyki przekształca relacje międzyludzkie, społeczeństwo, kulturę i politykę. Cel jest dwojaki: 1) ukazanie wpływu, jaki nowa genetyka wywiera na wyłonienie się nowych form ryzyka, etyki, indywidualnych i zbiorowych tożsamości, biopolityki i obywatelstwa oraz 2) krytyczna analiza dyskursu nowej genetyki
Patient rights, risk, and responsibilities in the genetic era – a right to know, a right not to know, or a duty to know?
No full textIntroduction
[b]Introduction and objective[/b]. As genetics tests ordered by physicians have implications not only for patients but also their relatives, they create a bioethical dilemma for both clinicians and patients. Especially when a patient is reluctant to undergo the test, know the genetic risk, and share such information with others. While international biomedical law recognises the right not to know one’s genetic status, it has been criticised for many reasons. This paper outlines the arguments for and against the right not to know about genetic risk.
Abbreviated description of the state of knowledge
Both medicine and bioethics acknowledge that information about genetic risk affects not only the individual but also other family members. Consequently, many argue that such information is not a private matter and should be regarded not as a right but as an obligation, or even a duty. Thus, it is emphasized that one’s right not to know is strictly related to the duty to inform others about any genetic risk. Yet others believe that constant proliferation of genetic testing and moralization of health issues poses a serious threat to patient rights and creates new opportunities for social surveillance and control. In both cases there can be observed an increasing ‘bioethecization’ of genetic discourse.
Summary
The paper suggests that the developments in genetics result in the emergence of new molecular ethics which stress that individuals have a moral and political duty to undergo the test, know the risk, and disclose that information to others. Consequently, it may transform the right to know into a duty and poses the question whether in the genetic context individuals should have the right to remain ignorant. Finally, the paper argues that genetic literacy becomes a source of biological citizenship
The Werther Effect, the Papageno Effect or No Effect? A Literature Review
No full textThis paper examines the association between media reporting on suicides and the subsequent suicides. Scientific papers from two online bibliographic sources Medline (PubMed) and PsycINFO were searched. The sample included 108 research papers examining the impact of different types of media stories on suicides. The review revealed that although the media can be a double-edged sword and serve both as a risk and a protective factor, the vast majority of research suggests that the relationship between the media reporting and the actual suicide rates is causal and real. Moreover, both the quantity and the quality of media reporting may trigger additional suicides in society. Simultaneously, research suggests that especially non-fictional presentations of celebrities’ suicides in newspapers and on television news have the biggest influence on the subsequent suicides. Additionally, a strong modelling effect of media reporting on suicide is based on nationality, age, and gender. However, research shows that because a negative reporting style can be modifiable and improved, the media can also have an educative or preventive effect and can reduce the risk of contagion. Consequently, it is important to monitor the implementation of media recommendations for the reporting of suicide, and continuous education of reporters is needed
Medicalization and geneticization: Consistency or change?
No full textChoć koncepcja medykalizacji należy do kanonów socjologii medycyny, to wraz z rozwojem
wiedzy i technologii genetycznych została ona wzbogacona o koncepcję genetyzacji. Wielu
badaczy akcentuje bowiem, że w dwudziestym pierwszym wieku genetyka przestała być tylko
nauką, a stała się szczególną ideą, sposobem postrzegania świata i ideologią. Pojęcia genetyczne
służą wszak wyjaśnianiu zdrowia i choroby, definiowaniu normy, patologii i tożsamości, zaś
myślenie w kategoriach genetycznego redukcjonizmu, determinizmu, fatalizmu i esencjalizmu
zastępuje inne formy interpretacji zjawisk biologicznych, społecznych i kulturowych. Celem
tekstu jest rekonstrukcja koncepcji genetyzacji sformułowanej w latach dziewięćdziesiątych
minionego wieku przez kanadyjską badaczkę Abby Lippman. Wychodząc od tezy o medykalizacji,
ukazuję jej intelektualne korzenie i główne kierunki badań. Dokonuję także jej krytycznej
ewaluacji i podejmuję próbę odpowiedzi na pytanie, czy koncepcja genetyzacji wprowadza
istotne novum, czy też powinna być rozumiana jako element szerszego procesu medykalizacji.Although the concept of medicalization belongs to the classical concepts of medical sociology, the
progress of genetic knowledge and the development of new biotechnologies extend its range to
include the concept of geneticization. Many authors suggest that in the 21st century genetics has
ceased to be a mere science and has become a unique idea, a new way of interpreting the world,
where basic genetic notions serve to explain health and disease, define norms, deviances, and
identity, while ways of thinking in terms of genetic reductionism, and determinism, fatalism and
essentialism replace other forms of interpretations of biological, social and cultural phenomena.
Thus, this paper aims to reconstruct the concept of geneticization coined by Abby Lippman in the
early 1990s. Beginning with the concept of medicalization it shows its intellectual background
and the main fields of research. It also critically evaluates the concept of geneticization and tries
to answer whether it brings a new insight into research or whether it should be regarded as part of
larger medicalization processes
Lay Constructions of Genetic Risk. A Case-study of the Polish Society of Huntington’s Disease
No full textThis article explores the lay constructions of genetic risk, the right not to know and the obligation to do a genetic test, know the risk and share genetic information with others. The study was carried out on 27 members of the Polish Society of Huntington’s Disease. I describe their understanding of bioethics and their arguments for and against the right not to know. I argue that lay perceptions of the risk, rights and obligations mentioned above are shaped not only by the type of genetic disease involved but also depend on the social group to which it poses a threat and/or costs. Consequently, such obligations are framed toward: future generations, family members, society, the State and oneself. I also argue that genetics is turning families into bioethicists who, as lay experts, become one of the key players in the biomedicalization of society and bioethicization of genetic discourse
Geneticization and Biobanking
No full textWhile biobanks constitute an indispensable source of scientific data, they also generate many concerns related to the ethical, legal and social aspects of acquiring and storing of human biological material, particularly when it comes to the matters of privacy and confidentiality of data and commercialization of research results. It is important as social perception of biobanking may have a bigger impact on the donors than real scientific achievements, while negative images of biobanks may negatively influence the readiness to donate. This, in turn, may impede the functioning of biobanks. Thus, the aim of this paper is to describe the main social anxieties related to gathering and usage of human biological material. Beginning with the concept of geneticization, the paper will tackle the most important social concerns regarding biobanking: creation of a unique genohype, geneticization of diagnostics and identity, the risk of genetic discrimination and commercialization of genetics and gene patenting
- …
