The fact that the emergence of “technoscience,” resulting from the coalescing of science and technology, may have serious social and cultural impact has been debated in recent years particularly with regard to the field of medicine. The present article is exploring the scope and limits of the “technoscientization” of medicine using the example of rare disease patient associations. It is investigated whether and to what extent these organizations adopt technoscientific illness identities and subscribe to the research priorities and objectives of (...) biomedicine. In addition, it is analyzed whether Paul Rabinow’s highly influential concept of biosociality entails a technoscientific model of identity or, quite to the contrary, offers a framework for contesting biomedical ascriptions of identities. As the article shows, patient associations do refer to technoscientific definitions of diseases yet constantly modify and transform them based on their everyday illness experiences. Likewise, the “biosociality” of rare disease patients emerges from the shared experience of having been neglected by mainstream medical research rather than from supposedly objective biomedical classifications. (shrink)

Cardiovascular diseases present the leading cause of death worldwide. Over the last decade, their preventio has become not only a central medical and public health issue but also a matter of political concern as well as a major market for pharma, nutrition, and exercise. A preventive assemblage has formed that integrates diverse kinds of knowledges, technologies, and actors, from molecular biology to social work, to foster a specific healthy lifestyle. In this article, the authors analyze this preventive assemblage as a (...) heterogeneous engineer, that is, as an attempt to order complex everyday life into an architecture of modernism. This article draws on research conducted as part of the interdisciplinary research cluster ‘‘preventive self’’ bringing together analyses from social anthropology, history, linguistics, sociology of knowledge, and medicine. The authors report here primarily from ethnographic investigations into biomedical research, primary care, and educational practices in kindergartens. The authors conclude that the preventive assemblage largely fails to install any kind of singular order. Instead, it is translated into existing orderings producing heterogeneity of a different nuance. (shrink)

This guest editorial opens with a brief overview of the transformations of medicine and mental health that can be observed since the second half of the twentieth century. New genetics and biotechnologies hold out the promise of overcoming presumed limitations in the field of mental health care, that is, the fact that diagnostic procedures in psychiatry and clinical psychology still largely rely on the narratives of patients and questionnaires, supposedly subjective assessments by physicians and psychologists. It is envisioned that innovative (...) genetic and proteomic tools, imaging technologies, and objective laboratory tests for blood biomarkers will enable better diagnosis and treatment of mental diseases. We argue that emerging biotechnologies do not revolutionize mental health, despite their promise to do so. Instead, we observe a pluralization of research and treatment approaches in the domain of mental health. The second part of this editorial discusses the contributions to this special issue on emerging biotechnologies and mental health and outlines how they address some of the gaps in social studies of psychiatry and mental health in the twenty-first century. (shrink)