The biopolitics of CFS/ME (Karfakis)

[pwme_92]

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1369848617300705?via=ihub
(See below for a link to download the complete paper)

https://www.s4me.info/threads/the-biopolitics-of-cfs-me.4546/
Related thread (and note the comments about some of the dated findings in the following paper)

Consider: if you are a sociologist or data technician curious about the flow of industry information to healthcare professionals and/or how dissemination of this sort (follows) influences diagnoses of ME/CFS, please contact me.

ABSTRACT
"This paper argues that Chronic Fatigue Syndrome/Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME) constitutes a biopolitical problem, a scientific object which needs to be studied, classified and regulated ... CFS/ME is an illness trapped between medicine and psychology, an illness that is open to debate and therefore difficult to manage and standardise. The paper delineates different interventions by medicine, science, the state and the patients themselves and concludes that CFS/ME remains elusive, only partially standardised, in an on-going battle between all the different actors that want to define it for their own situated interests."

Link to downloadable pdf from academic Google Drive account

 

[ebethc]

CFS/ME is an illness trapped between medicine and psychology, an illness that is open to debate and therefore difficult to manage and standardise.

B.S.

NOT trapped between medicine and psychology, b/c it's not a psych illness... Although the stress of constantly being gaslighted (gaslit?) could make someone go crazy....

It's only "open to debate" if you want to give ppl who say "the earth is flat" the time of day, which I don't.

 

[Learner1]

Thanks for sharing. But it's outdated and utter garbage. Good to know what's being published, though.

It's more useful to discover what's actually wrong with us medically and fix it, rather than debate biology vs. psychiatry

 

[pwme_92]

Thanks for sharing. But it's outdated and utter garbage. Good to know what's being published, though.

It's more useful to discover what's actually wrong with us medically and fix it, rather than debate biology vs. psychiatry

I can't say I disagree with your assessment, out of curiosity, I emailed the author to try and begin a dialog, I'm very curious to hear his viewpoint. (And, yes, I did ask about the delay in publishing the findings from when it seems as if the primary research was completed ... I'll report back if I hear anything from him!)

 

[Learner1]

That should be entertaining, at least!

 

[frozenborderline]

im fairly familiar with the kind of poststructuralist language used here, "assemblages" "biopolitics" etc... it's disappointing to see it be used in such a mediocre garbage work. there are indeed interesting "biopolitical" aspects of cfs. the paper doesn't explore these, rather siding with the state bureaucracies etc that seek to label patients hysterics... not transgressive, not scientific, not thought provoking. a more interesting biopolitical problem would be to explore how the State and psychiatry collude to "produce" hysterics etc, e.g. how they tend to be based in an austere and unscientific rejection of experience... which is after all "data" ....which nietzsche identified as a manifestation of the ascetic ideal in science

 

[kendonoghue]

Can we all appreciate the Orwellian irony that a paper: Biopolitics of "any disease", is paywalled.

I'm familiar with sci-hub, but still made me cts(chuckle to self).

 

[pwme_92]

Can we all appreciate the Orwellian irony that a paper: Biopolitics of "any disease", is paywalled.

I'm familiar with sci-hub, but still made me cts(chuckle to self).

 

[Tom Kindlon]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1027984598263910401